Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2022

File:2019-01-27 Team Relay at FIL World Luge Championships 2019 by Sandro Halank–059.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2022 at 19:50:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other team sports
Info Kevin Fischnaller and Andrea Vötter celebrate the medal winning at the Team Relay competition at 2019 FIL Luge World Championships in Winterberg, Germany; created, uploaded and nominated by Sandro Halank -- Sandro Halank (talk) 19:50, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sandro Halank (talk) 19:50, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting action but the picture is noisy and a bit dark. The light is not very compelling. Distracting background, with too many people, making the composition cluttered, in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your review. The lighting conditions on a Sunday afternoon at 5:28 PM in January were difficult. There was almost no daylight, there was no external lighting, and if I had turned up the ISO even more, there would have been a lot more noise. I don't think the people in the background are really disturbing; it's just a World Championship with spectators. The subject should be sufficiently clear. A smaller aperture would only have resulted in more blur for the two people in the foreground. --Sandro Halank (talk) 11:01, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The most embarrassing person is the guy with glasses at the right, in my view. But the crowd also retains attention and makes the picture busy. The lighting conditions might have been difficult, and I'm not saying you made a big mistake technically, however not all the pictures are FP-level, and this one falls short, I'm afraid. It's okay, but not awesome -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:16, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I like that we can see their faces, but not both of them completely, and yes, the background is distracting (Although I thought at first that these people were fans ... and I thought, wow, I never knew luge fans went to the extent of dressing like the competitors to show their support ). Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 01:48, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:فروغ فرخزاد.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2022 at 10:31:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People
Info created by H3etareh - uploaded by H3etareh - nominated by Persia -- Persia ☘ 10:31, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Original version

Support -- Persia ☘ 10:31, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Though it's a pretty good picture, it is smaller than the required minimum of 2 megapixels. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[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.

Higher quality uploaded--Persia ☘ 17:33, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So this is no longer FPX. Is this the largest size you have? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:09, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
this photo is enlarged from low quality B&W to A3 - 300 dpi. it could up-scale to A0 as well. H3etareh (talk) 08:03, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Upscaling is a bad idea. The photo looks good at about 30%. I shall have to oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment When was the original picture taken? --Kritzolina (talk) 11:13, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Probably the 50s.--Persia ☘ 18:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Second upload has just been upscaled, no improvement of quality, no more details. Please don’t do that. --Kreuz schnabel 23:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tight crops, looks a little overprocessed, and far too much unsharpness. Daniel Case (talk) 02:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kolczurka klapkowana Echinocystis lobata XII.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2022 at 22:52:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Order_:_(unplaced)
Info created by Januszk57 - uploaded by Januszk57 - nominated by Januszk57 -- Januszk57 (talk) 22:52, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Januszk57 (talk) 22:52, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Bland background Anpang01 (talk) 02:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Stacking errors (especially above).--Famberhorst (talk) 05:57, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I might call those irregular halos, but either way, have a look, please. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose too many stacking errors. --Ivar (talk) 12:23, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thank you Januszk57 (talk) 15:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Focus stacking problems everywhere -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:53, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 16:29, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Could be FP if not for the stacking problems Cmao20 (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kolczurka klapkowana Echinocystis lobata siatka XII.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2022 at 22:56:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Order_:_(unplaced)
Info created by Januszk57 - uploaded by Januszk57 - nominated by Januszk57 -- Januszk57 (talk) 22:56, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Januszk57 (talk) 22:56, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There appear to be halos. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "halos" are made by stacking program, additional cloning is needed. --Ivar (talk) 12:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. Thank you Januszk57 (talk) 16:00, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Whether haloes are an issue, or a fixable one, or not, doesn't make much of a difference with this slightly random composition. Daniel Case (talk) 16:27, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Could be FP if not for the stacking problems Cmao20 (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:55, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:FCAB GT22CU-3 2402 and 2401 at Cebollar.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2022 at 06:21:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 06:21, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:21, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:17, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:13, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 09:16, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 07:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:45, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 08:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 16:35, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:47, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support It's a little unsharp at distance, although not on the important parts, and that adds to the dreaminess of the image. I like the way you can make out the combination of North American and international signs on the road past the tracks. Daniel Case (talk) 05:57, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:WLM - 2020 - Castillo de Tosa de Mar.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2022 at 21:33:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Spain
Info created - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by me -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 21:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 21:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice triangle-based composition. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice atmosphere, appealing composition, good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Like the thinking behind the careful making of this image along with the choice of time and season. --GRDN711 (talk) 04:57, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:12, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 08:24, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 09:15, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per KoH, Basile, GRDN711. --Aristeas (talk) 10:19, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 12:01, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:45, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:58, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 16:35, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:12, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 14:13, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:31, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:49, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 07:58, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Berlin-Mitte - Amtsgericht I und Landgericht I - Haupttreppenhaus - Decke (2563).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Jan 2022 at 12:25:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Other ceilings
Info created & uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:25, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:25, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 14:56, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:57, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:06, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The ceiling pictures taken by T meltzer are really impressive to me. --IamMM (talk) 08:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 08:55, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support You definitely aren't a sock ;) - Benh (talk) 10:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:14, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 16:33, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support This was on my list to nominate but you got there first Cmao20 (talk) 18:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:45, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:30, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:55, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:50, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Slightly qualified support A faint bit of CA in the corners, and window lattices could have been handled better. But those are too minor to block a star for this one. Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 13:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Other ceilings

File:Saint Lawrence church in Pniewy (7).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2022 at 17:59:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Poland
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 17:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 17:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It takes a lot for a church interior to wow me, and I'm not sure I'm wowed by this, but it's certainly a beautiful and varied motif and I think the photo is a deserving candidate and merits a little love. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:23, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan Ezarateesteban 12:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting for me, lots to see and a colourful and good quality photo Cmao20 (talk) 18:13, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 12:31, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:12, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would crop the right side to get more symmetry --Llez (talk) 09:49, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:51, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 13:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Poland

File:Espirógrafo (Bispira volutacornis), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2020-07-23, DD 43.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2022 at 17:58:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Polychaeta
Info Twin fan worm (Bispira volutacornis), Arrábida Natural Park, Portugal. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 17:58, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:58, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Co mmon ists 18:28, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 11:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:10, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:23, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:18, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:39, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:30, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:06, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Noise is forgiveable. Daniel Case (talk) 16:34, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 17:51, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Messy composition. —kallerna (talk) 12:00, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 10:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good focus on the creature, and the composition is fine for me, there is enough separation of the subject from the background Cmao20 (talk) 17:47, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:52, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. The creature is very interesting to look at, the composition is good and the quality seems quite good for underwater photography. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:49, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:10, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals#Class_:_Polychaeta

File:La Fenice Opera House from the stage.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2022 at 14:53:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Italy
Info created and uploaded by Pietro Tessarin - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 14:53, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:53, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support This would be more clearly an FP if it were twice as big and looked as good or better at that size, but it's beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:22, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:30, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Co mmon ists 18:32, 24 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 11:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:54, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:12, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--PierreSelim (talk) 17:27, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 17:59, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:21, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:38, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:59, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:26, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Incredible view of a beautiful place. - Benh (talk) 15:59, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:06, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothning special for FP nominatin, IHMO. -- Karelj (talk) 17:44, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice motif and framing but the sharpness is improvable and resolution rather low Poco a poco (talk) 18:17, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 06:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:24, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:32, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 16:38, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clear FP to me despite the resolution Cmao20 (talk) 17:45, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:53, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Italy

File:Attack of a lioness on a giraffe 9.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 08:33:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Giraffidae (Giraffes)
Info created by Buiobuione - uploaded by Buiobuione -- Buiobuione (talk) 08:33, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Buiobuione (talk) 08:33, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery link did not work, fixed. Your friendly gallery link service ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 15:46, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, despite being a member for some time, I'm still a beginner with wikis. Thanks so much! Buiobuione (talk) 22:54, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems way too dark; please explain, Buiobuione. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It is something that I have always fought with and which, not being a professional and unfortunately not having adequate equipment, I have never been able to solve. The lighting and the calibration of the monitor (I have a laptop) leads me to accentuate the contrasts too much in Lightroom by increasing the black too much or, depending on the case, the white. In this case probably, the excess of dust in the air that made the image unclear in my opinion, probably led me to make this mistake. I'm sorry if this can get annoying Buiobuione (talk) 23:18, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The very simple answer I would give here concerning the darkness is: the sun is in front, not behind. Which means we see the side where the shadows are, not the side with light -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, actually this is the main reason that is repeated in all the shots of the attack sequence (it's on my profile) Buiobuione (talk) 09:04, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose If it were a much tighter closeup ... in which case we'd want it to be lighter. Daniel Case (talk) 21:30, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, no doubt it would have been better but if I had tried to take a close-up I would have gone the way of the giraffe Buiobuione (talk) 10:49, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice capture and maybe a QI, but not an FP per above. And one thing to keep in mind is that while there are definitely some allowances made for the difficulty of a shot, ultimately, what we're judging here is whether the result produced one of the best photos on the site, and we're spoiled for great wildlife photos by User:Charlesjsharp, User:Martin Falbisoner, User:Frank Schulenburg, User:JJ Harrison and several other folks. Regardless of the outcome of this nomination, you can certainly try COM:VIC, and a nomination at COM:VIC is also possible if you pick the right scope and determine whether this photo is best in scope. COM:Photography critiques can also be helpful, though responses are not always very timely. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Grazie davvero per la tua critica costruttiva, è anche per questo, per poter apprendere, che vi espongo qualche scatto. E grazie perchè mi ha fatto apprezzare il lavoro di User:Charlesjsharp, User:Martin Falbisoner, User:Frank Schulenburg e User:JJ Harrison . — Preceding unsigned comment added by Buiobuione (talk • contribs)

Prego. Ci sono ancora altri. User:Rhododendrites ha nominato molte belle foto di uccelli e mi ricordo un'eccellente foto di un scoiattolo. Vedi Commons:Featured pictures#Animals per tutte le foto degli animali. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I edited your photo Buiobuione to see if I could improve it. It would still not be FP (or QI) but I hope it might be an improvement. You can revert the images if you like it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:33, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have seen User:Charlesjsharp and I am infinitely grateful to you. I am still far behind in the use of wp and I would not be able to and moreover that shot is part of a sequence that I also sent to the wiki science and I do not think it is possible to modify it anymore. Finally, seeing your photos and those of others, however, I would never reach the perfection of your shots (I promise I will come back only if I really have something tricky to exhibit). In any case, your work helped me a lot to understand exactly the mistakes I made in post production with both this and other photos. You were really kind, thanks again Buiobuione (talk) 23:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Berlin - Haus des Rundfunks - Lichthof (Treppen 2822).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 08:59:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights
Info created and uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 08:59, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:59, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Impressive and agreeably different from our usual ornate ceilings, just a little bit soft IMHO. --Aristeas (talk) 15:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support High resolution though, so it doesn't bother me if it's slightly soft at pixel level Cmao20 (talk) 18:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:30, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:30, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:01, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:10, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I really like the 3-dimensionality of this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:08, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:49, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:05, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights

File:Lower Manhattan from Jersey City September 2020 panorama.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 11:08:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United_States
Info all by King of Hearts - nominated by Benh (talk) 11:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The type of cityscape I love. There's a tad too much room on top to my tastes, but the rest, quality, timing, mood, is top notch in my view. -- Benh (talk) 11:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would support, but first, I'd like to find out from King of Hearts whether he plans to nominate a few photos of this view as a set nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:16, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support fine with me. --Ivar (talk) 17:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:14, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination! @Ikan Kekek: I have no plans to turn this into a set. @Benh: If this were a normal cityscape, of course I wouldn't have left as much space at the top, but I like the effect of making the current WTC look insignificant compared to the two endless beams of light. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:54, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support, then. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 07:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:42, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 12:28, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice. I've tried to capture TiL a couple times and haven't figure out a good way to manage the light/weather challenges. e.g. e.g.. This is effective precisely because it allows for so much room at the top. This isn't primarily a skyline panorama IMO; it's primarily the Tribute in Light in context. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:32, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:01, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:38, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:12, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:47, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:01, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Pettstadt Mariae Geburt Decke-20211128-RM-151941.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2022 at 09:21:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany
Info created & uploaded by Ermell - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Admittedly, church ceilings sometimes seem a dime a dozen on FPC, and because we've seen so many good ones, nominations in this category that don't awe me sometimes don't inspire me enough to vote. However, I think this is a particularly outstanding church ceiling photo - a very large file and sharp at full resolution on my 23.5-inch monitor, and it's a beautiful and self-contained fresco that doesn't have competition from cut-off frescoes on the walls. I don't find the lamps terribly disturbing in the photo, although it's distressing if they drilled holes in the fresco to put them up. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:21, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan Kekek. --Cayambe (talk) 10:14, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nom Ikan --Ermell (talk) 22:52, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

You're very welcome. Merry Christmas! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:01, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:24, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 10:49, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:42, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:36, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:06, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothning special for FP nominatin, IHMO. -- Karelj (talk) 17:42, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 06:03, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Karelj--Co mmon ists 09:53, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Hahahahaha. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:41, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 11:50, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --IamMM (talk) 17:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special IMO. —kallerna (talk) 12:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same. It's good to browse, but photography-wise, it's a bit short. Not centered, and unfortunate hanging lights - Benh (talk) 19:54, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support FP for me, the interest of the motif itself overcomes the fact that it's not centred. Cmao20 (talk) 18:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany

File:White House Ruins, Canyon de Chelly 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 09:34:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#United States
Info created & uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:20, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:57, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:16, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 12:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 13:16, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:29, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:07, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 23:15, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:51, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like a pair of eyes ... Daniel Case (talk) 21:28, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:48, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 04:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#United States

File:Port of La Tour-de-Peilz (2).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 17:43:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Switzerland
Info IMO a well composed and attractive photo with nice colours. created by Tournasol7 - uploaded by Tournasol7 - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support A beautiful one. At the first glance the plentitude of boats is a bit overhelming, but in the end that plentitude and diversity is the subject of this photo. It is well-framed by the mountains, the clouds together with their reflections in the water, and the promenade at the left with the nicely placed reading (?) person on the bench which reminds me, thanks to the classic hat, of a staffage figure from a painting ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 17:58, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:47, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The composition is fine, but the harsh light prevents me from appreciating. An FP should be appealing, and light is one of the most important aspects of a photograph. I have no doubt this view would be far better under more special weather conditions and/or time of the day, hence my vote -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:31, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Basile. --Ivar (talk) 13:15, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above indeed Poco a poco (talk) 16:46, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination I feel that the enthusiasm towards this photo has been limited and I'd be better off nominating something new rather than hoping it scrapes together three more support votes. I still really like it though.

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 01:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2020-03-01 3rd run 4-man bobsleigh (Bobsleigh & Skeleton World Championships Altenberg 2020) by Sandro Halank–029.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 14:44:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other team sports
Info 3rd run 4-man bobsleigh at the Bobsleigh and Skeleton World Championships 2020 in Altenberg – Bobsleigh Team Friedrich: Francesco Friedrich, Candy Bauer, Martin Grothkopp, Alexander Schüller (Germany); created, uploaded and nominated by Sandro Halank -- Sandro Halank (talk) 14:44, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sandro Halank (talk) 14:44, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry; the fuzzy heads in the foreground are distracting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose When taking a picture of a rapid motion, a ultra-high-speed freeze is a good choice in some cases, mostly reciprocating motions like a jump in the air shot at its highest point. However, the freeze does not work here with that linear motion. The bobsleigh looks as if it was just nailed to the wall; no action, no motion visible, it’s a completely static picture. --Kreuz schnabel 22:23, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. Daniel Case (talk) 18:42, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peñón de Ifach, Calpe, España, 2014-07-01, DD 14.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2022 at 18:08:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain
Info Rock of Ifach, Calp, Spain. The massive limestone outcrop emerging from the sea and linked to the shore by rock debris is host to a national park. It is home to numerous rare plants, including a number of endemic species, and over 300 species of animals, and a nesting site for colonies of sea birds and other birds. Rising to 332 metres (1,089 ft), the rock is a striking visual feature of the Mediterranean coastline. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:08, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:08, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment 2 dust spots in the lower right and some more toward the left that are much harder to see. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:50, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Cleaned, thank you, Ikan Kekek, so far nobody had spotted that out although the image became FP on English and Spanish Wikipedias! --Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sure thing! Did you miss one dark one on top of the second furthest right rock, or is that a little cloud? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:45, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
It was indeed a dust spot, gone now thank you @Ikan Kekek! Poco a poco (talk) 11:09, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Great! I'm fine with the light and contrast, and I find this outcropping very imposing and well captured in this photo. In short, it has wow for me. And I also think it's the best of the QIs of this subject. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:18, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Contrast is a bit lacking. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:43, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done King of Hearts Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Anpang01 (talk) 02:48, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Little wow, and flat harsh lighting - Benh (talk) 09:44, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Co mmon ists 09:53, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 11:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The quality looks fine, but it is just a picture of rocks with dull light. Not an awesome image in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The light could be a bit better, but overall FP per Ikan. Cmao20 (talk) 18:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 18:57, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. --Ivar (talk) 13:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 14:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 14:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pseudotsuga menziesii var. glauca young female cone - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2022 at 19:02:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Pinaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 19:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:02, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:44, 25 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 02:56, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:24, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:58, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:43, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:38, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:06, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothning special for FP nominatin, IHMO. -- Karelj (talk) 17:39, 26 December 2021 (UTC)*[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 06:02, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 07:59, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 20:01, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:05, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:50, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 14:17, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:13, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:47, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Pinaceae

File:Treppe HBK auf Kampnagel.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 17:43:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info I know the resolution could be higher but I think this is such a striking and impressive photo it deserves the star. created by T meltzer - uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:43, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The usual attraction of spiral staircases (which has been captured very nicely in this case) is increased here by the beautiful contrast of warm and cold colours and by the compass rose motif which serves as a very appropriate centre and end of the spiral. --Aristeas (talk) 17:51, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:56, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:29, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:08, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:48, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I would have preferred a less off-center composition. Or only in one direction (vertically or horizontally, but not both). Still a striking view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:24, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:56, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:44, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 12:27, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support very nice, but I would expect more resolution from D800. --Ivar (talk) 13:16, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 14:11, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:25, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:40, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 15:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:39, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Very nice, but per resolution. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:20, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:15, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:02, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 16:47, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 03:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Buiobuione (talk) 18:11, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas Daniel Case (talk) 19:02, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Germany

File:Mandarin duck (Aix galericulata).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2022 at 01:58:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Aix
Info A mandarin drake swimming on a lake in Franconville, France. Created, uploaded and nominated by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 01:57, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 01:57, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice high-key portrait. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:57, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:00, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment For the record, this photo is sharper than any of the 4 existing FPs of Mandarin drakes. I'll live with the composition somewhat longer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:24, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per King of Hearts. --Aristeas (talk) 11:00, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 11:58, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:46, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:06, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:13, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:31, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blown highlights. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:48, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. --SHB2000 (talk) 22:40, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per King of Hearts. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:29, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool but a bit too smooth Anpang01 (talk) 02:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:08, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 20:02, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Charles. I like the duck, though. Daniel Case (talk) 22:25, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 05:05, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Highlights may be technically speaking blown, but what does it matter? The photo looks great. Cmao20 (talk) 18:07, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blown highlights, artificial cartoonish look --Yeriho (talk) 19:28, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:49, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Aix

File:Ardea alba with prey at Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge-1670.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2022 at 01:27:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus : Ardea
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:27, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Background has blurry lines, and what's the black thing it's eating? Anpang01 (talk) 02:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support A mouse. I don't mind the background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:04, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Dull light but great catch (both the animal and the photographer :-)) Basile Morin (talk) 03:42, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Co mmon ists 09:52, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 11:49, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:33, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:53, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:11, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:29, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 20:04, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 21:35, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:15, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:44, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:48, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:35, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:45, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:16, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:57, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 09:27, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus : Ardea

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Dernekamp, Baum -- 2021 -- 9412.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2022 at 06:22:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 06:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 06:22, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The composition does not work for me; it is slightly off-center, and there's nothing on the other side to balance it out. For a subject as dominant and symmetrical as this I suggest a centered composition. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:40, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

It was a difficult decision between this one and File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Dernekamp, Baum -- 2021 -- 9413.jpg. I think, you may prefer the second one. --XRay 💬 08:55, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would support the second one. --Ivar (talk) 12:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the second one is great. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:41, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sorry, but this one is just not an FP for me. Happy to support if the other one is presented as an alt. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:21, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Co mmon ists 09:50, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 11:46, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support I understand King of Heart’s reasoning, but call me stupid, in my eyes the composition works well. (The other one is good, too, but IMHO this one is more interesting, because the off-center position of the tree adds some dynamics to the composition.) --Aristeas (talk) 10:24, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special IMO. —kallerna (talk) 12:04, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the other photo better, though I'm unconvinced that has optimal crops, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:48, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
On the other one, I think a square crop would work very well, though I'd support either. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:33, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think not square but just crops closer to the tree on both sides. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:34, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support The composition works for me, I would oppose a square crop though. Having the tree off centre is much more interesting Cmao20 (talk) 18:11, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:46, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this version per reasons of KOH. --Ivar (talk) 13:09, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose These photos of these trees with that sky are just not working for me, unfortunately. Daniel Case (talk) 22:08, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:58, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Dernekamp, Bäume -- 2021 -- 9397.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jan 2022 at 06:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 06:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 06:20, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 07:58, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support That’s more like it. --Kreuz schnabel 08:38, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Co mmon ists 09:51, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Another sockpuppet of Livioandronico2013. - Benh (talk) 11:47, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:07, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well balanced, subtle -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:26, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:54, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:05, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:14, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:06, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:28, 27 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 09:15, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special IMO. —kallerna (talk) 12:03, 28 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful mood Cmao20 (talk) 18:09, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:53, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:48, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose QI for sure but, per Kallerna, the image doesn't stand out enough for FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:57, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile Morin and Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:23, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia

File:Natuurterrein De Famberhorst 05-12-2021. (d.j.b) 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2022 at 05:56:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Amylocorticiaceae
Info Plicaturopsis crispa on the cutting edge of a Alder. Focus stack of 23 photos.}}
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:07, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good idea but poor quality. There’s considerable noise, and the lower/outer edges of the fungi are showing a separate line as if the image had been stored at higher compression before, or oversharpened – this is just a guess of course, but it looks unnatural. The light is too harsh IMHO, the bright parts nearly (or actually) overexposed. For a static object, this image is well below FP threshold for me, sorry. --Kreuz schnabel 13:43, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your response which I certainly respect. Just a note about the noise and the harsh light, The entire object was wet from the rain and the photo was taken in the morning twilight.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the comment.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Palenis December 2021-1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2022 at 18:56:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily_:_Asteroideae
Info Flower and leaves of Pallenis maritima. In line with previous flower nominations: simple and beautiful, in my opinion. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 18:56, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Notable composition and contrast. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:47, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Question I presume this flower is small. About how big is it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:41, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info About 3cm diameter. Alvesgaspar (talk) 10:47, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. Really impressive detail for such a small flower. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:33, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:56, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the compo Poco a poco (talk) 16:46, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful contrast between the bright yellow flower and the subdued colours of the background. --Aristeas (talk) 20:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 04:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:17, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:03, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:22, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales#Subfamily_:_Asteroideae

File:Western burrowing owl, Glenn County-0550.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2022 at 21:01:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Strigidae_(True_Owls)
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:01, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Proud gaze, awake pose, right shooting moment! -- Radomianin (talk) 22:37, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Who? This owl, that's who! And quite a beautiful one. Have a Happy and Healthy New Year! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:40, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:18, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:04, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:15, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wildlife FP Poco a poco (talk) 16:39, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:45, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Argenberg (talk) 18:50, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin and Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:55, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 04:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:28, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:18, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not very large resolution but good light and nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:05, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 15:52, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:17, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Strigidae_(True_Owls)

File:Eolophus roseicapilla - Vogelburg Weilrod 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2022 at 07:31:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Cacatuidae (Cockatoos)
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:31, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support very good detail level with high reso. --Ivar (talk) 10:04, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:35, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:45, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:34, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ivar. --Aristeas (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:56, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 03:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 04:52, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:19, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:28, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:15, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:21, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Cacatuidae (Cockatoos)

File:Polystichum setiferum-20210427-RM-165358.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2022 at 16:42:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Dryopteridaceae
InfoShoots of a fern in a garden in Bamberg. Focus stack of 6 shots. Second try by Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 16:42, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 16:42, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely contre-jour lighting, something a bit different. I would also point out that the previous nomination would have passed had it not been for a vote from a banned sockpuppet user. Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:44, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful backlighting photo which shows the fascinating unrolling of the fern in an excellent way. --Aristeas (talk) 20:45, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I didn't vote last time, but this is striking me this time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:15, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:49, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:15, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Dryopteridaceae

File:Seal Rocks, Ocean Beach, San Francisco.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2022 at 15:00:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#California
Info View of the Seal Rocks at Ocean Beach near Lands End, western San Francisco. In the foreground is a thoughtful walker and in front of the rocks are some surfers. The area is part of the Golden Gate National Recreation Area. The Point Bonita Lighthouse with its own suspension bridge can be seen in the distance. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Radomianin (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:44, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:53, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice composition but a little pale and colourless for me. Cmao20 (talk) 18:36, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A beautiful, soothing composition, completed by the lonely walker. --Aristeas (talk) 20:44, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 03:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 04:50, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:22, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:56, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose: Good photo, but I'm not satisfied with the light. It's a bit hazy in the distance without something else (such as sunset colors?) to hold onto. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Average light but pleasant composition for me. The walker adds something and brings a bit of originality compared to the traditional nominations we meet here with landscapes only. Feeling of space with the two submerged hills and these long waves -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:29, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Improved version uploaded Dear reviewers Famberhorst, Vulphere, Cmao20, Aristeas, Frank Schulenburg, Rachmat04, IamMM, Agnes Monkelbaan, XRay, Ikan Kekek and Basile Morin: I applied a little more saturation and contrast on the image. Many regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 22:35, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not a big difference, and I'm not sure whether it's an improvement or not, but I'm also no longer sure about opposing, so I will no longer do so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The change is minor, so the difference is not very noticeable in my view. However, adding extra saturation to a picture that does not benefit from a great light at the beginning is not an approach I would encourage in general, because it often creates artificial render. We sometimes have to accept a photograph is not a painting, there are inherent aspects and various elements fixed from the instant, and more or less convincing together, according to different feelings -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your helpful and analytical thoughts on this topic :) -- Radomianin (talk) 09:05, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Almost a little overexposed on the upper rocks, but otherwise excellent. Daniel Case (talk) 22:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United_States#California

File:Common moorhen (Gallinula chloropus) France.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2022 at 21:06:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Rallidae_(Coots,_Rails_and_Crakes)
Info A Common moorhen walking on a rocks. Created, uploaded and nominated by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 21:06, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 21:06, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! I find dark birds difficult to capture. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:02, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:03, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:13, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 03:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 04:49, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:32, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:56, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for ideal sharpness, contrast and lighting conditions. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:55, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 10:35, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:18, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:25, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very sharp and well-lit photo. Cmao20 (talk) 01:21, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Compelling composition and nice light. However there's a bit of blue chromatic aberrations around the bird at the top -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:32, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 06:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:46, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:27, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 15:50, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:53, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Rallidae_(Coots,_Rails_and_Crakes)

File:Santa Maria della Vittoria September 2015-3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2022 at 11:26:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Italy
Info Ceiling of the church of Santa Maria della Vittoria, Rome. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:26, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 11:26, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's a great ceiling. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:12, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support It not only is a great ceiling, but also an excellent photograph of that ceiling ;) --Kritzolina (talk) 15:10, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:17, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a ceiling full of interesting details, but it just happens to be next to that other candidate, which is better quality-wise and highlights the shortcomings here. I can get it that tripods are not allowed in some places, but then maybe a monopod with a stabilized lens could help getting a longer exposure time (and lower ISO). Leaving the camera on the floor, facing upward, is another option. - Benh (talk) 18:18, 29 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose sorry, but I would expect more sharpness. --Ivar (talk) 13:18, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:48, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have hesitated because of the same reasons as mentioned by Benh, but overall the composition with the darker stuccos and the white angels framing the central fresco (?) with its delicate colours is so beautiful that it deserves the star. --Aristeas (talk) 10:34, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 09:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Italy

File:Southern Brown Bandicoot and Long-nosed Bandicoot 1672.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2022 at 07:55:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Peramelidae_(Bandicoots)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 07:55, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 07:55, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have to ask, how did he get them jumping at the same time like that? I don't think he would do any kind of trickery like Photoshopping one of them into the picture, so I'd have to say it's an amazing capture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There is one more of this action series. Male bandicoots defend their territory, so perhaps it was a territorial dispute. --Ivar (talk) 09:41, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I too wonder how. Triggered on movement? However it was taken, it's amazing. - Benh (talk) 09:46, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gorgeous wildlife-in-action photo :) -- Radomianin (talk) 09:49, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:24, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would guess he did it by putting his camera into burst mode and having it take lots of shots, could be wrong though. In any case this is great stuff Cmao20 (talk) 01:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great capture, but are the exif datas correct? Focal length "33 mm", how is it possible? I wonder how the photographer could get so close to the animals without scaring them -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:38, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 06:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 07:04, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question I'd love to know how you achieved this amazing shot of these two rare mammals JJ Harrison? 1/5 sec but flash did not fire? Did you have 'studio' lighting? It must be so unusual to have two endangered species together like this - are they wild? Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Basile Morin @Charlesjsharp, it would be interesting to know yes. In the meantime my best educated guess is that it's a triggered trap where the flash isn't directly connected to the camera. That would explains the 33mm and the unusual settings. - Benh (talk) 12:58, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Links in case some people don't know how a camera trap works. Example. --Cart (talk) 19:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a good example - flash is activated by camera in the set up illustrated. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Just giving a general idea, to distinguish from other traps where animals are captured. There is no way of knowing what Harrison's setup looked like. An external flash does not always register in the EXIF. Some flashes connected to and synced with the camera will give you a "Flash did not fire" in the EXIF if they use different standards. --Cart (talk) 12:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it was a camera trap - I used a camtraptions trigger and two off camera flashes. I think due to the lack of E-TTL the exif data is inaccurate with respect to the use of flash. JJ Harrison (talk) 21:39, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like their cartoon versions got caught en flagrante. Daniel Case (talk) 01:46, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:58, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:29, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Peramelidae_(Bandicoots)

File:Iglesia de San Sebastián, Setúbal, Portugal, 2021-09-10, DD 19-21 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2022 at 19:05:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Portugal
Info High altar of the parish Church of Saint Sebastian (in Portuguese «Igreja Paroquial de São Sebastião»), Setúbal, Portugal. The original church of São Sebastião was a small hermitage, built around 1490 on the site of the current viewpoint of the city of Setúbal. The current parish church of São Sebastião, located in the Dominican convent, was founded between 1564 and 1566, in a work sponsored by D. Sebastião. The design of the temple is attributed to Afonso Álvares, royal architect who built the churches of São Roque, in Lisbon, and Espírito Santo, in Évora. The work of the church of São Sebastião de Setúbal stands out for the military design of its structure, certainly derived from the training of Afonso Álvares as a military engineer. The interior, with a single nave, has interconnecting side chapels, and was originally covered by a barrel vault, destroyed in the earthquake and replaced by a wooden roof. Although it is not a Jesuit temple, its design fits into an architectural typology disclosed by the Society of Jesus in the second half of the 16th century, resulting in a building of large proportions, with a large and bright interior space, preceded by an imposing and austere façade. Although it has undergone some structural changes, the church of São Sebastião can be defined as "a remarkable building in the evolution of Portuguese architecture in the second half of the 16th century" and is listed as National Portuguese Monument (Idem, p.50). c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 19:05, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:05, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:38, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful church with extraordinary artwork and typical excellent image quality. Cmao20 (talk) 01:27, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 07:02, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 11:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 23:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:45, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:54, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Portugal

File:Halle (Saale) - Landgericht - Treppenhaus - Decke (2128).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2022 at 01:33:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Other_ceilings
Info Another truly amazing ceiling from T meltzer. No FPs of this building so far. I think it should be pretty obvious why I think it deserves the star, a really stunning view and very good image quality. created by T meltzer - uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:33, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:33, –3 January 2022 (UTC)
Support --IamMM (talk) 06:59, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 07:31, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 10:19, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:37, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:52, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive! -- Radomianin (talk) 23:05, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:34, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:42, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the spiral motif in place of the usual concentricity. Daniel Case (talk) 17:56, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:12, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural_elements#Other_ceilings

File:Berlin - Gemäldegalerie - Decke (7148).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2022 at 07:34:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights
Info created & uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:34, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I find the title misleading ("Treppe" means "stairs") and suggest a rename after the FPC process, but the image looks great Poco a poco (talk) 08:24, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Indeed – T meltzer’s photographs are great, but he uses rather generic filenames. Because this one is not only ambiguous, but even misleading I have taken the liberty to rename the file (and this nomination page) right now. I hope I have fixed all links. --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Have renamed some more of T meltzer’s photos to make further nominations easier ;–). Have proposed another gallery link here; IMHO this one fits nicely into the “Glass ceilings and skylights” section. --Aristeas (talk) 12:08, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per Poco --Ermell (talk) 10:30, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:01, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little grainy in the corners (closer to the viewer and painted pink), but the rest is great. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:44, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Built in 1998, no FoP in Germany for interiors. --A.Savin 13:53, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 00:00, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'll leave the FoP issue to others, if we are allowed to keep the picture then it should be FP Cmao20 (talk) 01:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Symmetrical beauty! -- Radomianin (talk) 10:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support These ceilings really stand appart because of the very precise execution. Photographer's was exactly where (s)he had to, in under* the dead center "of the frame" and levelling is perfect. I could ramble on on how this makes me want to support on a topic which I think is quite over represented here. - Benh (talk) 12:20, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:34, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 --IamMM (talk) 14:49, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 16:31, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:12, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful neutral I love it, looks like one of those funky airlocks in a sci-fi movie/TV show, but I'm not sure about the FoP issues. Daniel Case (talk) 03:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:15, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights

File:1922 Index of Great Trigonometrical Survey of India.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2022 at 21:36:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Maps#Maps_of_Asia
Info Index to the Great Trigonometrical Survey of India (1922). The survey had great scientific and popular accomplishments, namely being one of the first accurate measurements of a section of a longitude's arc, other measurements that led to the development of the theory of isostasy, and the measurements of the height of the Everest, K2, and Kanchenjunga (3 of the highest mountains in the world). Created by Government of India - uploaded by Shyamal - nominated by A. C. Santacruz -- A. C. Santacruz (talk) 21:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A. C. Santacruz (talk) 21:36, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, Very poor quality. Please read the image guidelines, and look at images already featured. Yann (talk) 21:43, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Yann: Very poor quality? I have not yet decided about supporting this but it’s an excellent scan of this historic map IMHO. Maybe you mistook a preview downscaled version for the full-sized one? --Kreuz schnabel 22:17, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yeah, I was going to say the same thing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 30 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I'm guessing @Yann looked at a non fully downloaded progressive Jpeg? - Benh (talk) 09:24, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The full image is over 24 million pixels and I think most of the merit as FP comes from its historic and scientific importance rather than the image itself (although I am an absolute sucker for maps and data visualizations). A. C. Santacruz (talk) 12:22, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very good scan of a very interesting special map. The triangulation was a fundamental invention for surveying and geography, and the triangulation or “trigonometrical survey” of whole countries and (sub)continents, like India in this case, was a heroic undertaking which made accurate, reliable maps possible for the first time. This map summarizes and illustrates the Great Trigonometrical Survey of India (1802–1871), one of the most important ventures of that kind. — @Yann: I have replaced {{FPX}} by {{FPX contested}}, as recommended in the documentation for {{FPX contested}}. No offence! I assume that there was just some misunderstanding somewhere … --Aristeas (talk) 08:29, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support according to Aristeas' convincing points. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:54, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. Very important document, and quite a clean scan. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's made with a Xerox, my first time seeing such a thing (Gen Z moment, I guess). I wish I had access to such a crisp scanner myself as I have a bunch of early 1900s Basque and Spanish documents as well as some old second-hand books with images that could really do with some scanning. this upload I made, for example is an A5 photograph but best I could do was take a photo with my Olympus Mirrorless. A. C. Santacruz (talk) 11:28, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kind of media that can hook me to a topic (triangulation here). But it would be nice that the description page summarizes this better (ELI5). What are the blue lines? red lines? green grid? Why only a "grid" pattern is covered by the survey? - Benh (talk) 12:46, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Wish I could tell you, Benh. These types of surveys are way out of my area of expertise, just found the file after some good ol' blue-link rabbit hole in WP and thought it deserved to be a featured picture. A. C. Santacruz (talk) 12:59, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Benh, I would guess (of course, we should not guess, but know, but educated guessing is better than nothing ;–): green lines = division of the sheets of the topographical map published by the government, the numbers and letters giving the order code of the individual sheets; dashed red lines = principal triangulation between the most important points; solid red lines = principal railway lines; blue lines = secondary triangulation. We would know more when we could find a copy of the Report for the year 1921–22 which was illustrated by this map. --Aristeas (talk) 15:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC) Update: I have searched the web for the Report, but have not found it (there are copies of an archeological report for India for the year 1921–22 online, but that’s not the same). Maybe somebody else can find it … --Aristeas (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not an expert either, but the green lines are a 1 degree grid (see edges of map). The red dash dot line says telegraph longitude area in the Reference section. These triangles are too big for visual triangulation. An old method to determine longitude was by telegraph communication. Also this report gives some more info on the whole project. It implies the blue triangles were the measurements taken in this undertaking. Theodor Langhorne Franklin (talk) 03:43, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Theodor Langhorne Franklin Thank you very much, that’s much better! --Aristeas (talk) 07:39, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aristeas, @Theodor Langhorne Franklin that was more to say that this pic has more value with a proper caption, but thanks a lot for your interesting insights. - Benh (talk) 13:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:57, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 16:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support high quality scan of a valuable historic map Buidhe (talk) 16:07, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 16:52, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:14, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:34, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Maps#Maps_of_Asia

File:Wittenburg Kirche ID 34504681 v001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2022 at 01:19:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info Found this while browsing Wiki Loves Monuments 2021 winners. A really nice drone shot with a compelling composition, nice colours, and strong image quality. created by Zedstyle - uploaded by Zedstyle - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful. A triple wow for light, colors and perspective! -- Radomianin (talk) 09:02, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 10:53, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 12:10, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ezarateesteban 16:14, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 16:30, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:58, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:14, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 15:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful light and mood. --Domob (talk) 09:09, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 21:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:16, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:31, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support ...the sky is partially burnt, still very nice Poco a poco (talk) 22:29, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:33, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany

File:Thirteen stories stone pagoda in Jeonghyesaji and star trails.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2022 at 07:10:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy
Info created by Jae-beom Choi - uploaded by Sadopaul - nominated by Sadopaul -- — Sadopaul 💬 📁 07:10, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- — Sadopaul 💬 📁 07:10, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great shot which is really impressive. Unfortunately, the photo is littered with hot pixels that are especially noticeable in the lower third. I would like to support the image, but have doubts whether hotpixels are tolerable for this type of shot. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:52, 31 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:02, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I will support if the fault Radomianin mentions is corrected. Cmao20 (talk) 18:33, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 00:55, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:03, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eurasian wren Franconville 04.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2022 at 14:05:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Troglodytidae_(Wrens)
Info An Eurasian wren singing on a log in Franconville, France. Created, uploaded and nominated by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 14:05, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:33, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 14:34, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:19, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 16:29, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:57, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:23, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice shot. I've highlighted some processing errors. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:23, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Should be fixed. --Alexis Lours (talk) 22:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Still could improve selective noise reduction. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm still seeing what looks like an additional wing on the right side (viewer's left) of the bird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:12, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do you mean the tail feathers? They have multiple layers of them and are not an issue with processing if that's what you mean. File:Eurasian_wren_Franconville_01.jpg shows this a little better with a side angle. --Alexis Lours (talk) 00:31, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see. Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:57, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support ---GRDN711 (talk) 00:10, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light, smooth background, pretty tiny wings -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:07, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:29, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:32, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 15:46, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:06, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --August Geyler (talk) 11:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:52, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Troglodytidae_(Wrens)

File:Pieris napi - Kulna.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2022 at 16:13:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Pieridae_(Whites_and_Sulphurs)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 16:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:13, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! top tip slightly less sharp.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:56, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks pretty sharp to me. Not wild about the crop though. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:25, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done, imho. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:28, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:40, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:15, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. Very high level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:06, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:33, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 15:44, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:04, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Argenberg (talk) 20:22, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:04, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:32, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Pieridae_(Whites_and_Sulphurs)

File:Trou de Bozouls (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 17:06:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Occitanie
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Really interesting motif, but not sharp enough. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A nice landscape but to me insufficiently sharp for FP, some bits that look motion-blurred, plus the tones are a little flat; the whole photo almost has an 'old style HDR' look and I don't think the processing has worked quite right. Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @Tournasol7: IMHO this view is really impressive, the village and the valley are beautiful and almost too good to be true. It would really be worth if you could return to that place and repeat the shot in better light and at base ISO setting, this could also improve the sharpness. --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sun Shining Into a Barge.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2022 at 09:45:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Ships
Info created & uploaded by GuavaTrain - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This image rejected at QI. Haven't we seen one like this nominated before? Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:00, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: This nominiation was also rejected in QIC. --IamMM (talk)

Question Did you check into why? It wasn't on account of any issue of quality. See Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 07 2021: "Seems good, but from the description I can’t understand what I am looking at. Is it a banks of polluted water body? Or an aerial shot?" By contrast, here is the rejection notice for this photo: "Interesting scene, but imo poor detail from denoising." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:42, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The photo is taken standing inside the empty cargo hold of an big tanker that usually holds asphalt. The pipes are used to heat the asphalt and keep it warm and in a liquid state; a dirty and hazardous environment. The sunlight shines through the now open cargo hatches while the tanker is moored at a quay. Not a sight you often see, so as a ship nerd this naturally caught my interest, hence my visit to this nom. If the scene looks familiar, it may remind you of the 2019 WLM winner. --Cart (talk) 22:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanations and comments. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:50, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Nice atmosphere and light but insufficient image quality for FP - noise, lack of detail, blown highlights, probably tilted. Cmao20 (talk) 03:09, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment At least the tilt should be fixed. Yann (talk) 14:22, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 15:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aerial view to Motovun.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2022 at 15:00:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Croatia
Info This great capture I found by coincidence during the gallery categorization of quality images. Thanks to user XRay for the successful nomination :) This aerial photo shows the Croatian village of Motovun. Regardless of some slight image noise, I find it FP-worthy. It has won the first place at WLM Croatia. Created and uploaded by Ekaterina Polischuk (talk) – nominated by -- Radomianin (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:00, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Great view indeed and nice light but poor quality, it's just too grainy --Poco a poco (talk) 16:40, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ per Poco a poco. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:30, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another photo that was on my list of possible FPs. It's a bit noisy as others have said but IMO fine for a 20mpx photo and the composition is wonderful. Cmao20 (talk) 18:35, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info new version with partial denoising uploaded. --Ivar (talk) 19:22, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your improvement, Ivar. I was thinking about doing a denoising by myself and uploading it as a derivative file. Since already awarded photos are subject to special editing protection, I always have some doubts. For this reason, I added a retouch template on the file page to be on the safe side. @Poco a poco: @Fischer.H: @Cmao20: The user Ivar has kindly done a partial denoising. Many regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 21:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info to the author: Dear user @Ekaterina Polischuk: as part of the nomination for the Featured pictures program, your original photo has been slightly denoised by an experienced user. This editing was just a proposal which you can reverse at any time. If necessary, please feel free to denoise your original version by yourself and upload it. Thank you very much and many regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 21:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

An improvement, thank you, I'm moving to Weak support --Poco a poco (talk) 22:26, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support very good light conditions and outstanding composition. --Ivar (talk) 19:24, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Ivar and Cmao20. (Side note: The best one of the aerial photographs by that user.) --Aristeas (talk) 20:43, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per all supporters. I can forgive the noise on a drone shot, and it's not really distracting here. But maybe Ekaterina Polischuk sees us and can redo the sharpening and NR ? (My guess it's that it comes mostly from the Sharpen Edge Masking which is set to 0) - Benh (talk) 20:47, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:11, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose: Beautiful photo, but I feel like it's a bit too grainy to be one of the greatest photos on Commons. Might the photo be edited to be more nearly pinpoint clear? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:21, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review and editing suggestion, Ikan. With selective blurring and subsequent sharpening options, I did not get the desired results. Unfortunately, this worsens the image. Perhaps Ivar has another idea? Many regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 23:55, 1 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

All my best to you as well! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:34, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, wishing you a happy and first a healthy New Year :) -- Radomianin (talk) 11:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I feel like 'pinpoint clarity' and 'reduction of grain' are a little self contradictory. The more noise reduction you do, the less sharp the image will be - a sad but unavoidable fact about image processing. I think the image is better than it was, though. But I understand why some might still consider it to fall short. Cmao20 (talk) 01:59, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's already been sharpened without edge masking (see EXIF), so it's going to be difficult to get rid of the noise without blurring the details away. It's better to contact author so she can rework on the NR and sharpening from the RAW. - Benh (talk) 09:42, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Further note: Regarding the edit/discussion, I left a message on the author's talk page. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:15, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautiful scenery, very well composed. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:43, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:29, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:27, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 11:07, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 16:45, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very appealing light. The clouds are nice too. Great view -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:21, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overprocessed --Uoaei1 (talk) 21:55, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:18, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful weak oppose; great shot but overprocessed. Daniel Case (talk) 18:16, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#Croatia

File:Hattem, Gevelsteen van Stellingmolen De Hoop 13-09-2021. (actm.).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2022 at 05:34:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others facade stone.
Info Hattem, facade stone of Stellingmolen De Hoop, built in 1806. Destroyed by fire in 1897.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:34, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:34, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:33, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm getting this as a QI and VI, but I'm not understanding it as an FP, but I might be missing something. Is this an extremely famous national monument? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: As far as we know, this is the only tangible remnant of windmill De Hoop anno 1806. The history is described on https://www.molendatabase.org/molendb.php?step=details&nummer=5319 Personally I find it an intriguing photo of a facing brick with a loaded past. I have tried to portray the object as accurately as possible. I'll leave that to someone else to judge.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:23, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for the reply. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:12, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I see this as a kind of vanitas still life. The inscription with the name of the windmill is very appropriate for this – “hoop” could be translated as “hope”, right? The clogs placed on the top and on the right are somewhat odd, but complete the still life. They seem to say: “Stranger, once living people like you walked in these clogs and run that mill which was called ‘Hope’ and indeed was a flourishing trade in its time; now they are all dead and gone, their hope has been scattered, just like you, your hopes and fears will vanish and die.” ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 10:48, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Many thanks for Aristeas' convincing points of view. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:30, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good photo, and I get the arguments for it, but the bottom line to me is that I'm not getting a satisfying linear arabesque out of it, and there's nothing else that sufficiently substitutes for it. Symbolism and pathos are great, but for the most part, you still need a convincing form, and I mean no disrespect in saying that I myself am not seeing one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:26, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love it, for me this has a lot of artistic quality --Kritzolina (talk) 18:13, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good image quality as usual for you, and as to the reasoning for FP, Aristeas has said it all. Interesting photo that offers something unique. Cmao20 (talk) 01:22, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:35, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 14:46, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak support due to historic value. Daniel Case (talk) 21:37, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per the others. I like the composition (even though it is very basic), and the historic value is a nice bonus. --Domob (talk) 09:14, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 13:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Others

File:Gesloten bloem van de paardenbloem (Taraxacum officinale) 09-05-2021. (d.j.b) 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2022 at 18:42:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Cichorioideae
Info Closed flower of the dandelion (Taraxacum officinale) in the early morning. Focus stack of 22 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 18:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 18:42, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:04, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:22, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:05, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --August Geyler (talk) 13:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 14:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 23:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 03:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, can you though take care of the sticking issue I noted? Poco a poco (talk) 22:27, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Small correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:31, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support Some haloing/CA around the edges, but generally relatively minor. Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 04:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Cichorioideae

File:Iglesia de San Julián, Setúbal, Portugal, 2021-09-08, DD 10-12 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Jan 2022 at 18:53:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Portugal
Info Ceiling of St.Julian's Church, in Portuguese "Igreja de São Julião", located on the centric Praça de Bocage (town hall quare), Setúbal, Portugal. The church was originally built in the second half of the 13th century in medieval style and was rebuilt at the beginning of the 16th century by order of King Manuel I in Manueline style. In 1531 a strong earthquake struck Setúbal and the church was damaged; the building was considerably modified in Mannerist style and reinaugurated in 1570. The original church was almost completely destroyed by the Great Earthquake of 1755 and was greatly rebuilt and redecorated in the last third of the 18th century following the late Baroque style. From this stage date the general appearance of the façade, the inner wooden roof, the painted tiles, the main and lateral altarpieces and the main chapel. The nave of the church is divided in three aisles by arches built during the Mannerist repair works following the 1531 earthquake. The columns are decorated in talha dourada (a typical Portuguese technique to decorate woodwork with gold leaves). Today it is the main church (matriz) of the city classified as National Monument in 1910. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:53, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:36, 2 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and huge resolution, definitely deserves the star. However Poco a poco I think you will need to withdraw this nomination as otherwise you will have three open at once. Cmao20 (talk) 01:26, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Cmao20, I closed the another nom now. Actually that was exactly my intention but I forgot,...Poco a poco (talk) 14:39, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --IamMM (talk) 07:02, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very impressive ceiling and photograph. Gallery link refined to the extra gallery for ceilings of religious buildings. --Aristeas (talk) 11:07, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:12, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:52, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:18, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:07, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 04:17, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Portugal

File:Extended universe logarithmic illustration (English annotated).png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2022 at 06:49:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Astronomy
Info created and uploaded by Pablo Carlos Budassi - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 06:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:49, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very interesting and elaborate image, I'd really like to understand it. Pablo Carlos Budassi as your representation of the universe is centered on the Earth (per your description) I would have expected the Earth in the middle with the (minimal or average?) distance of all other planets and celestial bodies to it. Otherweise, I'd have expected that planets that are further from the Earth are depicted further from the Earth than those that are closer. E.g. Neptune is further from the Earth than Saturn is but in the image it's closer to the Earth. Finally I'm not sure about the benefit from having all those annotations in the description page as it's redundant to the information already provided in the image. Poco a poco (talk) 08:45, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: I should mention that there is also another version of this image in the form of a circle and a white background, the elements of which have different dimensions. I put it as an alternative.--IamMM (talk) 15:03, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the alt, IamMM, the questions above still remain. It wasn't my intention to discourage other reviewers with my questions, I just wanted to understand what I look at. If somebody else apart from the author can give a hint with regards to my questions above, I'd be very thankful. --Poco a poco (talk) 15:17, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Same questions here as Poco. It’s nice but beyond that I cannot see any scientific value here. Neither directions, nor distances, nor size proportions do match, and our own Milky Way is surely not as far away as the Andromeda galaxy, which is certainly a bit further off than the asteroid belt :) & the distant galaxies do not line up into filaments as the picture suggests, and so on. For me, this is just a nice artistic composition of celestial bodies arranged around the sun with no further meaning. --Kreuz schnabel 19:06, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Kreuzschnabel and Poco a poco: Incorporating the entire universe into a digital image is, of course, a matter of controversy and the only one who can give an accurate answer to these issues is the creator. I don't agree that this is just an artistic image, by the way for me this is one of the few times that I have prioritized the scientific value of the image instead of artistic beauty and also different versions of this image have been used to create a better understanding the Universe article in different WP languages. In a visual logarithmic function, creating proportions between the sizes of objects that can pose serious challenges. For example in the solar system, Jupiter is 24,000 times larger than Mercury and it's practically impossible to create a real ratio. This is also the case in geographical maps. IMO considering the position and distance of the Triangulum galaxy with the Milky Way and Andromeda, the creator tried to show the correct distance and ratio of the three main galaxies of the Local Group.

Sorry for the possible spelling mistakes. --IamMM (talk) 11:06, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The annotations are unhelpful and unnecessary because the heavenly bodies are all named in the image and the annotations are way too close together for people to make a lot of sense out of them at thumbnail size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative Version[edit]

Support I don't know exactly what I'm seeing either, but I think it's a great photo!--Famberhorst (talk) 17:41, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support: Impresssive picture with detailed annotations. NOTE:This picture is illustrated in logarithmic scale in order to make it possible to include the whole observable universe, otherwise this image will be full of blank and astronomical objects will be hard to find. --Steven Sun (talk) 11:52, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support If it makes sense according to the logarithmic scale, I support, because it's quite beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This one makes more sense to me. The other one seems to suggest that there is "nothing" outside the areas we can actually observe, this one just does not show those areas. But is seems like the description is wrong when it says that it is centered on Earth. As far as I can tell, it is clearly centered on the sun? It would be great if User:Unmismoobjetivo could have a look at that ... --El Grafo (talk) 09:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Everything discussed above is very useful.

About the description "centered on Earth": it is true that the schematic illustration is not strictly Earth-centered. It is centered in the Solar System (average position of Earth during the year). The description on the commons page has already been fixed.

Regarding the unnecessary annotations: as the content is very dense and the annotations very numerous, it is probably right to question the utility on that scale of presentation. I added these annotations to be potentially used in a situation where the image is seen in desktop presentation and in the full width of the window (not for thumbnail as usual in Wikipedia).

About directions: The directions here were not taken into account (anyway it is difficult to plot directions of a sphere in 2d circle (seaming a cut of a sphere) without overlapping both hemispheres) but a version with the directions with one sense would be interesting.

About distances: distances were taken into account (with some discrepancies - artistic license in pursuit of visual balance) with a criterion from the center (Sun) to the edges, which was referenced from here: https://www.astro.princeton.edu/universe/

About sizes: As the description says, the sizes were enlarged and accommodated in each celestial body to appreciate its shape. In any case, I would not say that sizes are meaningless since in my opinion they can serve to give a notion of size comparison at least in objects of the same type (eg gas giants).

On Andromeda being further away than the Milky Way: It is true, if I remember correctly, at least 10 diameters of the Milky Way further away. In these positions it is only intended to show the situation of the local group of galaxies with only 3 large galaxies including Triangulum.

I will be attentive to this nomination page in case there are more doubts about the content of this schematic graphic. Sorry, but I don't know if it is appropriate for me to write here or it is better for the author to refrain from commenting. Unmismoobjetivo (talk) 17:13, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Something else to keep in mind about the versions: in the original of this nomination labeled "Extended" the edges fade to a reddish noise, this is not "nothing" but it is the cosmic web of galaxies seen from so far away that we can't perceive distinguishable structures (filaments) but a grainy texture (red by the redshift at the time of our observation). This image includes unobservable portions of the universe and the alternate (circular) version is limited to the sphere of the observable universe. Unmismoobjetivo (talk) 04:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Unmismoobjetivo thanks a lot for the reply! First of all, it is absolutely fine for the author to engage in the discussion here. Especially in cases like this, where open questions keep people from committing to a vote, a comment from the author can be really helpful. Clarifying edits to the file description page while the vote is already are also highly encouraged. We've even seen major reworks of nominated files halfway though the vote - that can get a bit messy, but as long as it's handled in a transparent matter, it can be a good thing.

Your comments above are very enlightening, maybe consider whether some of that could find a place in the file description too?

Re: the "nothing": that's pretty much what I meant to say ;-) --El Grafo (talk) 09:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Winterpanorama von der Milseburg.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Jan 2022 at 11:00:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Hesse
Info Panoramic view (300°) from the Milseburg in the Rhön Mountains, Hesse, Germany. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 11:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 11:00, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Absolutely impressive panorama, well done and beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 11:20, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, a great achievement. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry I have never found these extreme ratios panorama useful nor aesthetically pleasing to the eye. They cannot really be enjoyed "as a coherent single thing" and if they are to be browsed, then they fall short compared to spherical panoramas. Most of the scene is also in the shade, making for a not so eye catching sight. - Benh (talk) 21:50, 3 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I do take Benh's point, 360 degree panoramas are not my favourite either, but this is so fun to explore in full size, and although a lot of it is in shade, I do still find it has the wow-factor. Cmao20 (talk) 01:24, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I think we say the same thing, but just to be clear, spherical panos are also 360. Just they are 360x180° so, while they are not so enjoyable to look at in their entirety, they provide much more immersion with a proper viewer. - Benh (talk) 08:12, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Benh. Two problems: 1) Too much is in the shade, and 2) my appreciation of landscapes in general is not compatible with such long long formats. I think because the pleasure of the eyes is to be able to circulate through a picture. When you shrink that much a scenery, the sight gets blocked: the eyes just go left or right, but not up and down, through the content. Unless you zoom very big, such extreme ratios are not aesthetic, in my opinion. However the major problem is definitely the light, and it's visible from the thumbnail: there are only two tiny parts of sunny areas : one at the left and another one at the center. The whole rest is darkness. No light in a photograph = no wow. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:37, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Benh --Michielverbeek (talk) 06:23, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I love exploring (and shooting) large panoramas myself, but I agree with Benh and the others on this one. It is fun to explore, but not particularly striking with the shadows. I also prefer sphericals, although they are of course not always possible (and sometimes they are mostly boring sky and ground, so perhaps in this case the format you chose is better suited). --Domob (talk) 09:12, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yes, most of it is fairly dark, but there are some light patches. I think that the combination makes this an excellent photo. (I readily admit that I'm a big fan of panoramics.) — Preceding unsigned comment added by MartinD (talk • contribs)
Oppose Too much in shade. Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 13:46, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lac de Vallon 19.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 17:07:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question What do you find great about this picture? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The colors, trunks, roots, I like this mode of nature. But that's just my taste so I might be wrong. Tournasol7 (talk) 06:41, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing is wrong in taste, and thanks for answering, so that I can consider your point of view. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:05, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose However, in looking at the photo again, the composition isn't working for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:48, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support I like the still reflections in the water and the contrast of soft greens and rich purples. But I agree with Ikan that the wow-factor may be a little lacking. I feel like I'd like to have seen what's further to the right of the photo, maybe a panoramic format would have worked better Cmao20 (talk) 00:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition, dull light and bland colors. Nothing special in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think I can see what inspired you to take this shot. I really love the color of the lake, maybe even more so in other shots from that series. But I'm missing a clear subject or compositional idea here. There may very well be a FP in this scene, but this is not it. Sorry, --El Grafo (talk) 08:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common Wood Pigeon facing left.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2022 at 14:56:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Columbidae_(Pigeons_and_Doves)
Info Close-up of a Common wood pigeon head. Picture was only minimally edited for color correction. The bird was in full sunlight with a tree in the shade behind causing a black background. All by Alexis Lours. -- Alexis Lours (talk) 14:56, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 14:56, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 17:13, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 23:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 08:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:47, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful portrait. --Aristeas (talk) 11:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great detail Poco a poco (talk) 22:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:17, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 06:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Columbidae_(Pigeons_and_Doves)

File:KiwiRail DXB class Kekerengu.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2022 at 14:22:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 14:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 14:22, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as usual Cmao20 (talk) 03:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 08:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:31, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:45, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not as eye-catching as other photos by Kabelleger, but beautiful at the second glance (vaninishing-point composition, soft mist over the sea, contrast between subduded landscape colours and bright colours on the train, etc.). --Aristeas (talk) 11:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. —Bruce1ee^talk 12:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:34, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mosbatho (talk) 16:06, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:2019-04-06 Dieter M. Weidenbach StP 4058 by Stepro.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 03:53:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Frescos and murals
Info Mural "Kinderfreuden" by Dieter M. Weidenbach, created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support -- Stepro (talk) 03:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual, interesting mural, very good depiction. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 10:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 11:22, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:59, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. Cmao20 (talk) 17:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 17:44, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual and extraordinary work of a great painter, who in the former GDR was subjected to the hostility of the repressive State Security Service. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:45, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:20, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 07:36, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Others#Frescos and murals

File:Dwellings and pirogues on the Mekong bank of Don Det Laos at sunrise with pink clouds.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 01:13:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Laos
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Subtle and lovely, could be a painting. Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Formidable. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 07:43, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support As I said at QIC, I love this photo. The fact that the houses remind me of the Malay houses I knew and the one I lived in as a child and therefore touch my feeling of nostalgia is just a bonus for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:48, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Your valuable advice at QIC is always enlightening here (like for this one recently promoted). Thanks! -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing. Have a good year and stay healthy! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

👍 Thank you very much -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay 💬 10:30, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:48, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very very beautiful, indeed painterly. --Aristeas (talk) 11:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:28, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Atmospheric moment of a lovely place which awakens the wanderlust! -- Radomianin (talk) 21:00, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd have cropped a bit of sky but anyhow FP Poco a poco (talk) 22:22, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:37, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very moody light, and I was thinking the same as Poco if you care ;) - Benh (talk) 12:31, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I care, and thank you very much, Poco and Benh, for the suggestion of your reviews. I gave a try to a 16:10 ratio and then notice a slight difference. The small cloud at the upper center disappears, and the horizon line is more in the middle. Your preferences totally make sense and I respect them to the point of hesitating to upload this new version. However, I also like the chaotic or random aspect of the sky in the current file. I find it wilder and perhaps other people share my feeling. Since 12 other reviewers already supported this version, I must admit I'm also a bit reluctant to survey them for a second look, that could lead to different appreciations :-) Thus I keep this 3:2 ratio, while being very grateful for sharing your constructive feedbacks -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:24, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 07:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Laos

File:Ic1805 136x420+92x420+147x420 2625m 43.8h.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 03:03:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Astronomy#Nebulae
Info First of all please note that this is not a space agency photo from Hubble or similar, it is amateur astrophotography from a user with an account on Commons. As such I think it's outstanding, it can't match the sharpness of NASA photos obviously but it's really incredible work anyway and to me deserves the star for being a beautiful, high-resolution, high-quality photo. The subject is the Heart Nebula in the constellation of Cassiopeia, which currently has no FPs. The author has provided considerable detail on the hardware and software used as well as his own interesting personal reflections on the technical challenges. Created by Ram samudrala - uploaded by Ram samudrala - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 03:03, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 03:03, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Absolutely stunning. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Boy does that ever deserve the star! Extraordinary! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:46, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It already seems to have plenty

. Daniel Case (talk) 06:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Great, but the file should be renamed. --Yann (talk) 09:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yann, I don't think it should. IC 1805 is not a number generated by the camera, it is the reference of the Heart Nebula in the Index Catalogue, which is one of the two major catalogues astronomers use to refer to objects in the deep sky (because colloquial names such as 'Heart Nebula' are often inconsistently used). The other is the New General Catalogue. As for the other numbers in the title, they seem to be part of the author's personal code for technical information, and they correspond to data in the image description. Cmao20 (talk) 16:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support An extraterrestrial painting. --Aristeas (talk) 11:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Professional images have a higher resolution but we did not miss many sights. It has become remarkable as an amateur shot with cheap hardware. --IamMM (talk) 12:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It doesn't need a disclaimer. Even it this comes from James Webb ST, I would still support it. - Benh (talk) 12:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I completely agree. But I prefer to nominate this kind of photo than NASA photos, I find it really impressive that amateurs can do this. Thanks for your vote. Cmao20 (talk) 17:02, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --A.Savin 13:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:50, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning. Incidentally the author has an article on WP -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:36, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 02:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 07:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy#Nebulae

Wow, thank you everyone, Cmao20! I'm glad people enjoyed the output of my hobby! --Ram Samudrala

You're very welcome Ram samudrala, thank you for taking and uploading this photo. Cmao20 (talk) 21:07, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gran Autere dlieja dla Madona te Sëlva.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 08:57:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 08:57, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think gallery should change to this. --IamMM (talk) 11:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, that’s a good idea; thanks to Yann for changing it! --Aristeas (talk) 18:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 17:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 17:41, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:29, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:24, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:32, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:53, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:11, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy

File:Kapelle auf dem Michaelsberg - Untergrombach 23 - Deckengemälde Wappen Hochstift Speyer.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 07:21:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:21, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:30, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:51, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:58, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:28, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:14, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:19, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Relatively simple but satisfying composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:33, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Good quality as usual but honestly I don't find this motif particularly interesting compared to the wonderful ceilings in this category. I would oppose but I won't spoil for no good reason the photo's chances of being promoted in five days. Cmao20 (talk) 19:45, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:05, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:10, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Germany

File:Ratargul 785.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 19:40:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info created and uploaded by Abdulmominbd - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 19:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:40, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd support if the strong CA is removed. Poco a poco (talk) 22:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Per Poco a poco: Good composition, good choice of subject and powerful image potential. It is a big pity that the grain and the strong chromatic aberrations decrease the technical quality. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:25, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I'd revise my vote if the strong CA is removed (BTW I wonder how it could be QI) -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:28, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice motif but yes, the strong chromatic aberration and the posterisation visible on the man's face do affect my vote. The noise doesn't bother me so much. Cmao20 (talk) 00:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I am trying to reduce the strong CAs right now (but it’s a difficult case). Just mentioning this here to avoid that two of us do the same work … --Aristeas (talk) 08:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Because the photo is a WLE winner and a QI (oops!), I have uploaded my derivative version under a new name: Ratargul 785 retouched.jpg. @Poco a poco, Radomianin, Basile Morin, and Cmao20: Please have a look. Is this variant better? Should we nominate it as an alternative version here? Do you have further suggestions? Best, --Aristeas (talk) 10:32, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the enhancement, which is a big difference from the original version. However, I still find the posterization on the man's skin areas quite disturbing, though I would rather support the retouched version than the current one. Many regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 12:58, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that the face does not look great. There is also posterization in some other places, but the one on the face is the most irritating. Can anybody help to improve the face? I have to confess that I don’t know how to reduce the posterization there. Any help is greatly appreciated! ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 14:47, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Radomianin. Still I would move to neutral for this improved version. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would support the alt. The man isn't so huge in the picture and doesn't look so bad to me in this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per the technical reasons cited by others. Daniel Case (talk) 22:10, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image:NOX 2019 TFB Papafilipou.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Jan 2022 at 19:51:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports
Info This picture shows the perfect balance of a TF drag bike: the front wheel is in the air, the "wheeliebars" (a support structure that prevents the rollover backwards) do not touch the ground and cannot impair the driving dynamics through the leverage. The entire driving force of the engine lies on the rear wheel. Created by Auge=mit - uploaded by Auge=mit - nominated by Auge=mit -- Auge=mit (talk) 19:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Auge=mit (talk) 19:51, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support works for me, fine!!! Ezarateesteban 22:36, 4 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:08, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Almost an airplane :-) The crop at the right is tight but due to the shape I don't find it too disturbing. Interesting vehicle and rider, educative description. Basile Morin (talk) 02:12, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:30, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:59, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitely wow. --Domob (talk) 09:08, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A very nice capture, but not the optimal crop. A 3:2 aspect ratio does not suit the long vehicle well, and the tail end is a little too close to the edge. Also a bit dark. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:30, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I just find the background makes it too ordinary. Daniel Case (talk) 05:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sorry, but that all happened on a RACETRACK, what do you expect for the background?... a wallpaper with flowers, a sunset? ;-)... best regards, --Auge=mit (talk) 11:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:39, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Motorsports

File:Bodion (Symphodus roissali) construyendo su nido, Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2020-07-23, DD 13.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 22:12:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Labridae_(Wrasses)
Info Male 12 cm (4.7 in)-long five-spotted wrasse (Symphodus roissali) finalizing his nest during breeding season (typically from April to July), which will be offered to females so that they can spawn in there, Arrábida Natural Park, Portugal. This species of wrasse are native to the eastern Atlantic Ocean from the Bay of Biscay to Morocco and through the coastal waters of the Mediterranean Sea and the Black Sea. It inhabits rocky areas usually within beds of at depths from up to 1 to 30 m (3.3 to 98.4 ft). It can reach 17 cm (6.7 in) in standard length, though usually not more than 12 cm (4.7 in) and feeds on molluscs, bivalves, gastropods, shrimps, sea-urchins and hydroids. If the male finds a female spawing in the nest he will then keep watch until the eclosion. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Note that this image had been FP before but after Commonist's vote was invalidated due to sockpuppetry (whole story here) it lost the star, so I'm trying my luck again here. Again it is a HQ image of a nice composition but with an interesting story behind it IMHO. Poco a poco (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:12, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice one. Cmao20 (talk) 00:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am impressed by the care and effort that fish makes for building the nest and the photo shows that perfectly. --Aristeas (talk) 08:57, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:24, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 09:26, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:34, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --—Cayambe (talk) 18:11, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weakish Support, but support nevertheless, per my comments in the previous nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 12:52, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I mind the crop at left less now ... Daniel Case (talk) 22:12, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish#Family_:_Labridae_(Wrasses)

File:Sevilla 2012.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2022 at 01:54:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Spain
Info Another of T meltzer's excellent ceilings, this time a church in Spain as opposed to the civic buildings in Germany we have seen so far. In my view one of the richest, most detailed and beautiful church ceilings I have seen on Commons. It is the Church of Saint Louis of France, a late eighteenth century Baroque building originally constructed as a headquarters for the Jesuits. created by T meltzer - uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:54, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Special. Support per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:16, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Grandiose dome, very good photo. --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:25, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:58, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfect, beautiful capture. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:23, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support When ceilings are taken like that... no brainer support for me. Lens used looks pretty good! - Benh (talk) 12:34, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, I thought the same. Seems that this is not only a very good lens, but also that T meltzer has got an excellent, well-centered copy. Congratulations! Sometimes it is very hard to find such a copy … and this is a kind of photo for which such a well-centered copy is really necessary. --Aristeas (talk) 15:21, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Ermell (talk) 17:07, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support As the "2012" in file name shall not mean the year the photo was taken, it's kind of misleading and maybe worth a rename... But all else is really fine. --A.Savin 18:33, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A.Savin, will do that after the nomination is finished. Cmao20 (talk) 20:22, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A.Savin, just to notify that I have sent a request for this file to be renamed to File:Dome of Church of San Luis de los Franceses, Sevilla.jpg as per your suggestion Cmao20 (talk) 16:18, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --IamMM (talk) 08:27, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:29, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:30, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:56, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:14, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Spain

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Dernekamp, Baum -- 2021 -- 9413.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2022 at 10:38:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 10:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info This image isn't a crop of File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Dernekamp, Baum -- 2021 -- 9412.jpg. Some comments showed interest in the picture with the tree in the middle. Therefore, I would like to nominate this picture (after the other picture has not been successfully nominated). --XRay 💬 10:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 10:38, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support fine with me now. --Ivar (talk) 11:53, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:45, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pleasant, central composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:39, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I miss more ground. A tree has roots (to be evoked). The crop at the bottom is too tight currently. I dare oppose because the image does not really galvanize me, overall. I feel this is more a kind of QI. The other one showed subtle colors in the sky and a more sophisticated composition. This image is too ordinary in my view, not special enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:49, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review. BTW: At the photograph would be only more field at the bottom. More tree root isn't visible. --XRay 💬 05:25, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. What I meant by "to be evoked" is like lead room missing, in that case (and in my view). This very thin portion of soil, thick like a thread, is inelegant in my opinion. I feel cramped, my eyes miss space. That's my main objection, however, this plant with white sky and nothing more also appears very common to me. The crop at the top is not generous either. I don't see anything more than a QI -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:35, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Unfortunately, you have set very high standards of moody landscapes with great lighting, and I don't quite see that here. The lighting is dull, the sky overexposed, and the centered framing would work better for me if it weren't for the busy background. I don't think f/16 was necessary either. Aside of reviewing matters, may I suggest you use this photo as leading picture of the en:The_Ladd_Company article ? ;) - Benh (talk) 12:32, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:36, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was one of the crazy few who preferred the asymmetrical variant ;–), but this one is impressive enough, too. --Aristeas 11:45, 7 January 2022
Support --IamMM (talk) 14:12, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Aristeas, I strongly preferred the off-centre version but this is still FP to me Cmao20 (talk) 03:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know if the left and right crops are ideal or not (I'd probably recommend closer crops on both sides, partly to eliminate the bush near the right margin), but they're certainly reasonable, and the movement of the tree is so strong that it really makes this photo. To me, this is by far the best composition of the three tree photos you've nominated recently. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:54, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:32, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support OK, this one I'll like. Daniel Case (talk) 03:42, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:41, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 14:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia

File:Параклис во Тресонче (2).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2022 at 09:09:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
Info created by Petrovskyz - uploaded by Petrovskyz - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:09, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition with a closed fence in front of an ordinary building. The midday light is a bit harsh. The landscape is not spectacular. Overall not special enough in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no wow for me Buidhe (talk) 02:24, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The blurry plant in the foreground on the left annoys me, otherwise interesting and well composed Cmao20 (talk) 03:06, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 19:23, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support To me it is a balanced photo of a beautiful object.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:44, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. Немного шумновато (a little noise), но, как я понял, основной объект всё же — дом, с ним всё ОК. В любом случае, если не получится тут, в QI всё должно пройти без проблем. Sorry for Russian :) --Brateevsky {talk} 10:42, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the above mentioned elements are part of the charm. --B. Jankuloski (talk) 09:46, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 14:37, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Спиковски Водопад во Равна Река 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2022 at 08:19:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
Info created by Petrovskyz - uploaded by Petrovskyz - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:19, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Burnt sky and blown highlights, flat light. Also not a spectacular fall in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:57, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile, sorry. --Domob (talk) 09:08, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I actually really like it, I find the composition really satisfying and although the light may not be that dramatic the wow of the photo is in the subtle richness of the green and ochre shades which is fun to explore at full size. Cmao20 (talk) 03:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose per Basile (in part), but if the top could be unblown, I'd support per Cmao20. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:56, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others; lower right half is wonderful but upper left is anything but. Daniel Case (talk) 19:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Ivar (talk) 14:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Torre de Xlendi, isla de Gozo, Malta, 2021-08-22, DD 89-91 HDR.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2022 at 20:54:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications
Info Salt pans and Xlendi Tower, Gozo Island, Malta. The tower, one of the Lascaris towers, dates from 1650 and is the oldest of the four surviving watchtowers on Gozo. It was built by the Order of Saint John in limestone. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition, pleasant light -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:54, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The new version looks artificial. Compared to the original in the history, there is a sort of mask over the lower half. It lacks natural now. I notice the change really by chance, because I was not notified yesterday after the modification. Unfortunately such transformations without warning the previous voters really happen too often with your candidatures, Poco. I think minor changes are acceptable, but here this is a big difference in my opinion. Better abstain from voting next time -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:53, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This is not a fair comment, Basile Morin. If I apply a change on request of a reviewer it is logic that I wait for feedback. In this case the feedback isn't positive and I was asked to revert, so I'd have done that and the issue would have been over. Otherwise I'd have had to warn everybody twice for nothing. Assuming I'd have warned nobody is not really AGF Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only two reviewers were notified, not all. No warning to me after new upload on January 12 at 22:50 means misleading vote until the change is detected. -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Basile Morin: I thought you talked about the perspective correction change that I tried and reverted, not about the brightness adjustment at the bottom. To be honest I didn't consider that kind of change so relevant. I checked it again and cannot realise what you commented above about the unnatural look, but ok, will ping everybody about everything in the future, no problem with that. Poco a poco (talk) 12:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info For the record, the modification was reverted at 18:52 after withdrawal of the candidature at 18:50, thus my comment and oppose vote are valid for the previous version -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'd suggest cropping out the bottom third or so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice golden light, I like the bottom third of the composition honestly because the shapes of the salt pan pavement help lead the eye to the tower. Cmao20 (talk) 14:35, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I think they still would minus the bottom third, but there would be less of them and a smaller shadowy area. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:48, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek, Cmao20 I wouldn't really like to crop the bottom, it's a nice texture and patter, therefore I adjusted the curves (it's brigther now at the bottom) to equalize it with the rest of the image. Hopefully it helps. --Poco a poco (talk) 22:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, I think that is a real improvement. Much fewer shadowy areas. Cmao20 (talk) 00:43, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:48, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Somewhat flat appearance, in my opinion lacks depth --Yeriho (talk) 16:24, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yeriho: To be honest, I don't know what you mean, can you please elaborate your comment? I see texture, shadows, depth, perspective... Poco a poco (talk) 22:52, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose You might have the bad luck here that I have been to this place and I really love it. This is in a way a great shot of the tower, the colours are just right, but - and for me this is a very BIG but - the saltpans were created to hold water. They are flat. They need to be flat do do what they are supposed to do. In this picture many of them look tilted. This is greatly disturbing me, it feels like misleading the viewers. --Kritzolina (talk) 07:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kritzolina That's due to the lens I used, I can upload this evening a version with a perspective correction, no problem with that. Poco a poco (talk) 12:39, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that this is from the lens you used, but as I said, the result is so different than the reality of the place I find it disturbing. I would welcome a different version where the water would not be running out of the saltpans Kritzolina (talk) 15:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Kritzolina: New version uploaded Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, like Basile I think the original version was the overall better image. The saltpans look better in this one, but still not really level - so I would suggest reverting to the original version and living with my unhappiness. --Kritzolina (talk) 07:24, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand your feedback either, Kritzolina. You got what you asked for IMHO (or at least I think that I was on the way to get there) and still ask to revert, I don't get it. Never mind, I take this nom back. --Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice looking image. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice colors, but that's about it. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2014 Fremington Edge 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Jan 2022 at 14:18:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_Kingdom#England
Info all by Kreuzschnabel -- Kreuz schnabel 14:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Found this browsing my holiday pics and found it Commons-worthy. Taken just a minute before File:2014 Fremington Edge.jpg yet a completely different image, dominated by the sky. Being a pixelpeeper myself, I am aware it’s not the utmost top of quality but I think the cloud (ordered by intense prayer the evening before and delivered in time) gives it some wow. --Kreuz schnabel 14:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as creator. -- Kreuz schnabel 14:18, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 17:00, 5 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Great cloud. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:10, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice, but IMO not enough for FP. --A.Savin 21:01, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I do like photos with a big dramatic sky. Cmao20 (talk) 03:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good, nothing special enough to be FP. Yann (talk) 10:03, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Yann. Daniel Case (talk) 03:43, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice and simple, per nomination --Yeriho (talk) 16:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Yann, sorry, Poco a poco (talk) 19:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2020-01-22 Ski Jumping Competition Round Nordic Mixed Team (2020 Winter Youth Olympics) by Sandro Halank–166.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 14:11:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual snow sports
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Sandro Halank -- Sandro Halank (talk) 14:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sandro Halank (talk) 14:11, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could be a bit sharper but it has wow to me --Poco a poco (talk) 22:15, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:20, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:59, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:00, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 09:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is so boring to me as a sports and winter sports photographer. If this gets featured, I could nominate a thousand more ski jumpers like that one, but I do not nominate boring and soft images. --Granada (talk) 11:54, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A thousand like that one? -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:48, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:06, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 04:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:26, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Individual snow sports

File:Marktplatz 18 in Lauf an der Pegnitz (2).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2022 at 17:02:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 17:02, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice but not particularly great to me, and the light is OK but not that special, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:36, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice motif but flat and grey light. Cmao20 (talk) 14:34, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Very good and straight composition. But light can't be rated more than OK. --August Geyler (talk) 20:01, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek, Cmao20, August Geyler: New version uploaded, Tournasol7 (talk) 20:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral It did improve a little. --August Geyler (talk) 00:03, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I agree, but I still oppose it for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per others, just not enough there for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 04:41, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Almond with two kernels.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2022 at 07:10:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info all by -- Ivar (talk) 07:10, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:10, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice work. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:23, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 08:18, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 17:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:17, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:26, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:00, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:41, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:51, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:28, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hulged (talk) 07:43, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Almond joy ... Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 19:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)

File:Balmoral Castle panorama 20211026.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Jan 2022 at 09:05:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#United_Kingdom
Info created by Domob - uploaded by Domob - nominated by Domob -- Domob (talk) 09:05, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wish the rainbow was a little stronger, but the castle itself is a featurable subject in my opinion. The rainbow adds a nice touch, and also balances the composition from left to right in my view. --Domob (talk) 09:05, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Domob (talk) 09:05, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ It's a very nice catch, but I don't think it needed a bended panorama here. Given that you used Hugin, you can probably reprocess and try with a straight projection like "rectilinear", or "panini general"? Just my two cents. There's a lot of chroma artifacts that I'd attribute to the demosaicing process? It doesn't look like NR. And I would also recommend you don't stop down this much on your camera. f/8 is a rule of thumb for landscape photos on full frames. But the equivalent on a micro four third is f/4 (crop factor of 2). Here, it's as if you took a picture @f/16 (on FF) which affects IQ ~~quite a lot~~ to some extent. - Benh (talk) 12:20, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Good point. The full panorama spans 145 degrees horizontally, so I was under the impression that a rectlinear projection would not look very well; but I've now played around a bit with it and the relative positioning of the castle, and think the new version is definitely better. Thanks for the other feedback as well! I'm aware of the relation of f-values on my sensor, but thought that usually f/11 or higher is used on fullframe for landscapes (and was usually satisfied with f/8 for my camera, without noticing too much diffraction) -- I'll keep that in mind and try out changes in the future. Is there anything specifically you suggest I could do in post processing about the artefacts you see? --Domob (talk) 16:02, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In the first version, the roof line of the main building was falling off towards the left, which made sense given the perspective. In the second version it is falling off towards the center of the image, which does not make any sense to me at all. Maybe just aim for it to be horizontal? --El Grafo (talk) 16:33, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That's an interesting observation, and it does indeed look a bit weird. I've aimed for the verticals to be correct, rather than horizontal lines in the perspective. I tried playing around with the roof as well, but wasn't able to produce anything that looked more realistic or better. After checking back on the map, I actually think that this view is the correct perspective, and the castle is sloping away from the viewer towards the centre in reality. --Domob (talk) 17:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with @El Grafo and, that's an easy fix. In Hugin, you go to preview, and then "move/Drag" and move it until you are satisfied with the roof line. You can hold Ctrl or Shift (forgot) to drag along a single axis (so you will keep ur verticals). Another way is to set horizontal guidelines, but that would force you to redo your panorama from scratch AFAIK. - Benh (talk) 18:05, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I tried that (including setting horizontal control points). The effect is that the forest on the right is extremely distorted. If you check on the map (e.g. OpenStreetMap), you will see that the castle is actually for real moving backwards in relation to the line of the forest on the right, so with a composition like the one in the picture (viewing towards the centre between castle and forest) it is expected that the perspective is as it is. --Domob (talk) 18:13, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair point. Thanks for taking our reviews into account. Moved my vote to Neutral. - Benh (talk) 20:29, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, and thank you very much for the helpful feedback! --Domob (talk) 06:32, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply, Domob: You are absolutely right, I misinterpreted the camera angle(s) relative to the various objects in the frame. I guess I'll also just stay Neutral, this image is messing with my brain ;-) Pinging @Iifar: in case you'd like to reconsider your oppose – not that it would change the outcome --El Grafo (talk) 09:22, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
El Grafo: perspective along the roof on this is much more natural. --Ivar (talk) 09:55, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The difference between those two pictures is the direction in which the camera is pointing (or the "virtual" direction based on the panorama projection). In the picture you linked, the direction is more orthogonal to the building, while in the panorama it has some angle (the building is sloping away from the viewer towards the centre), which leads to this perspective. I can totally see how it looks "weird", though (but as far as I can tell, it is natural in this case). --Domob (talk) 10:01, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Benh: At approximately 3,000 px high (12 MP), I don't think f/16 FF has any noticeable impact on IQ. It's only on high-resolution sensors that diffraction starts to kick in at the pixel level. The blur on the edges looks like lens imperfections, but since it's already stopped down to f/8 I think this is just the best the lens is capable of producing. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:36, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@King of Hearts, you are right, it's probably not very noticeable, but I'm fairly sure the sweet spot is at around f/4 (the sweet spot is often around f/8 in FF equiv.). So might as well use it here where DOF is not really an issue. That was more a general advice, because I see there's a lot of confusion of these equivalences between camera formats. I updated my comment. I wasn't talking about the blur on the edges but more about the weird chroma speckles along the edges (excuse my english). Maybe it's the demosaicing or just that Domob was light on chroma NR. anyways, who cares? It's more than good enough qualitywise. - Benh (talk) 20:26, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --A.Savin 21:06, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special. A more generous portion of grass (like in the previous version) would be fine also in my view, but I respect your choice here -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:55, 6 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per El Grafo comments. --Ivar (talk) 08:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. (Yes, as Benh has noted, the castle and the foliage could probably be even crispier at ƒ/5.6 or so, but it’s still good.) Just, as Basile has already mentioned, could you bring back a little bit more grass at the bottom? IMHO it would be more balanced then. --Aristeas (talk) 11:03, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Agreed. I've added a bit more grass on the bottom now. --Domob (talk) 12:43, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 13:10, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support for this new version which I like most. Thanks for improving your beautiful picture :) -- Radomianin (talk) 12:55, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I would say, thanks to all of you in the commons community for helping me improve the picture :) --Domob (talk) 14:36, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --IamMM (talk) 14:11, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The rainbow adds a nice touch to the composition. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:18, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great pano. Any perspective issues are minor and don't detract from it for me Buidhe (talk) 00:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 10:01, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:30, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:44, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:28, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 19:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The Avenue des Champs-Élysées and the Arc de Triomphe, Paris 27 December 2021.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2022 at 10:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#France
Info created by Pierre Blaché (Flickr) - uploaded and nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 10:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 10:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Bright areas a bit too bright? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:21, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think you mean the black point is set too low (i.e. darkish areas are a bit too bright). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:28, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That, too, but the way the headlights run together in the background is problematic to me, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:38, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I see Ikan's point but the special light and composition makes this FP to me Cmao20 (talk) 03:10, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I just find this composition too busy and too skewed to the warmer tones without any really good contrasting cooler tones. Daniel Case (talk) 03:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zerlegung einer ausgebauten Stahlnietenbrücke in Leipzig Anger-Crottendorf (Dia).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2022 at 10:17:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info created by August Geyler - uploaded by August Geyler - nominated by Augustgeyler -- August Geyler (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- August Geyler (talk) 10:17, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 14:14, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 17:04, 7 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Strong tilt (8 degrees CW). Very dark with harsh contrasts. Most of the content is hard to distinguish, so not a striking image in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the subject but regretfully per Basile Cmao20 (talk) 03:09, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the scene. Also, as a former Nikon film shooter, I like how you created this image. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:32, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dramatic scene and educative. The strong contrast is IMHO OK, this is a stark photo. (At the first glance I thought it could be sharper, but considering the circumstances and that this was shot on film the quality is really good.) --Aristeas (talk) 11:05, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 14:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per F. Schulenburg and Aristeas. These days, I still sometimes shoot analog, to not lose the feeling for film. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:08, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit of denosing would help, though Poco a poco (talk) 22:25, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:15, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not striking as a composition, and has some technical shortcomings, but oh my God the grittiness of this ... I would totally buy it as having been shot in the '30s or '40s. Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Argenberg (talk) 10:17, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#People at work

File:מבט על נמל קיסריה.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2022 at 17:18:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#Israel
Info Created and uploaded by Idomeir - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:26, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too soft at corners. Interesting shape though. Daniel Case (talk) 03:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination This image does not seem to create enough passion so I give up. Thanks The Cosmonaut and Daniel --IamMM (talk) 06:18, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carrion crow (Corvus corone) head.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2022 at 10:55:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Corvidae (Crows, Jays and Magpies)
Info Close-up of a Carrion crow head. All by Alexis Lours. -- Alexis Lours (talk) 10:55, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 10:55, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:16, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:33, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I see a path and a landscape through the eye, and the sun, near the horizon, reveals the special light featured on this side -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:04, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great capture. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:11, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:34, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Corvidae (Crows, Jays and Magpies)

File:Black-necked Stork Corbett India Dec19 D72 12989.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 03:29:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Ciconiidae_(Storks)
Info created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 03:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bengali Wikipedia POTD on 21 Oct 2020 -- Tagooty (talk) 03:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I think it's really impressive to have the bird in flight and the composition is nice but to me the focus is just not sharp enough for FP. Additionally the highlights are blown on the wings but that is a more minor concern Cmao20 (talk) 03:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao, sorry. --Ermell (talk) 09:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the feedback. --Tagooty (talk) 02:50, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Andreaskirche in Trages im Winter.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2022 at 20:14:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info created by August Geyler - uploaded by August Geyler| - nominated by Augustgeyler -- August Geyler (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- August Geyler (talk) 20:14, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow, just a church --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:47, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A tree blocking much of the facade is not a fantastic look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The branches are obstructing. Ordinary architecture -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:56, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan and Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Nice church and I like the square crop but not sure it has any outstanding features that make it more than QI Cmao20 (talk) 18:49, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Trees framing the church might look nicer in leaf, but not bare. Light feels too harsh. Composition just seems too random with that bit of road in the background. And frankly this is not the right time of year for me to be trying to judge this picture, not when it looks like my outside on a day with temperatures around -12ºC and likely to get colder overnight. Daniel Case (talk) 23:00, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:39, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Barbaros Monument in Istanbul, Beşiktaş.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2022 at 19:40:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures
Info created by Jelican9 - uploaded by Jelican9 - nominated by Jelican9 -- Jelican9 (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jelican9 (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose In shadow and not that sharp. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor light. Apparently there is a little bit of sun at the lower corner of the picture, unfortunately these rays are far far from the subject -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:54, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan and Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting subject but not oustanding light and a bit noisy. Cmao20 (talk) 18:46, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Right crop is awkward, but even fixing it somehow wouldn't change the way the streetlights disrupt the aesthetics. And given that this has gotten no support !votes beyond the nominator's, I strongly suggest withdrawal of this nomination. Daniel Case (talk) 18:27, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kleine kaaszwam (Skeletocutis nivea). 07-01-2022. (d.j.b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2022 at 17:00:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Polyporaceae.
Info Skeletocutis nivea on a dead twig. Focus stack of 29 photos. (Diameter of the dead twig ~22 mm.)
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:00, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, and very impressive considering the size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:27, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:08, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:28, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a halo around the branch and the twigs, that looks weird. It seems that some frames were darker than others in the batch -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: the background consists of fallen leaves under the trees in various (autumn) colors. During the shoot, the camera was anchored on a short tripod.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:45, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I find strange the clear outline following the shape of the object, as if the background behind the branch was more luminous, but perhaps it is just a coincidence -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:22, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:43, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:22, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The beauty of the small things in nature ... Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi#Family : Polyporaceae

File:TR Yedigöller asv2021-10 img07.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2022 at 13:35:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Turkey
Info A scenic view in the highland part of Yedigöller (Seven Lakes) National Park, Turkey ---- all by me --A.Savin 13:35, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:35, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 17:07, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive autumn scene with beautiful fall colours and graceful contours of the hills. --Aristeas (talk) 18:18, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Aristeas --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:26, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't find the composition very compelling. Also, colors are not very vibrant, partly because it is slightly past peak foliage but more importantly because of the time of day. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:29, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Indeed per KoH, sorry, Poco a poco (talk) 22:16, 8 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks like a random flick in the woods, colors are strange --Yeriho (talk) 16:23, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Autumn is known for, if anything, vibrantly colored trees, which this image seems to be trying to avoid. I look at it and I want to blow the dust off it, since the sky seems more subdued than it would have been in reality as well. Beyond that, the landscape is not very striking in and of itself. Daniel Case (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose With KoH and Daniel Case --August Geyler (talk) 17:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Freedom Tower Miami (top), NE view.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2022 at 12:55:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#United_States
Info Top of the Freedom Tower in Miami, Florida. The building commemorates Cuban immigration and nowadays houses, among other facilities, a museum. It was designed by architect George A. Fuller and completed in 1925. Created, uploaded and nominated by Radomianin -- Radomianin (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:55, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The palm branches frame the tower nicely and add a specific Miami feeling to the photo. --Aristeas (talk) 15:29, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm unduly annoyed by the degree to which the branch on the left overlaps our view of the tower, and I tend to think that makes this not one of the greatest photos on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:15, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Exactly per Ikan: it would work better if the left branch did not overlap. Incidentally, according to the edges, it seems the building is slightly leaning to the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per above but also I'd just like to see more of the tower. I can see what you were thinking but I feel like the view of just the top of the tower is a little awkward and leaves you wishing to know what's below the bottom of the frame. Cmao20 (talk) 19:47, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you all very much for the constructive thoughts and suggestions. Please allow me to describe my view that moved me to nominate it: I like the central composition, framed below by fronds of the Cuban king palm and above by feather clouds. It is just my personal opinion and a feeling that this image detail underlines the symbolism of the Freedom Tower. Best wishes :) -- Radomianin (talk) 21:08, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm not bothered by the palm frond; it covers so little of this and hey, after all, this building is in Miami. Daniel Case (talk) 22:59, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Ikan and Cmao20. Many positive features but also elements that seem discordant - --GRDN711 (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Ikan. --Yann (talk) 19:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:11, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orange Chat 9034.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2022 at 07:25:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Meliphagidae_(Honeyeaters)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 07:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:25, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for composition, color contrast, sharpness. Pretty birdie. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:57, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support quite a beautiful and colourful image. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:57, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:40, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 16:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:57, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:51, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:22, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:06, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:55, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 15:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 21:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:12, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Meliphagidae_(Honeyeaters)

File:Saint Eligius church in Chaptelat 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 19:39:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 19:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 19:39, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light, no great composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan, I'm fine with stormy skies but this one is just a bit grey and flat Cmao20 (talk) 01:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:21, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2021 Gugelhammer Bogenbrücke 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2022 at 15:19:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Germany
Info created & uploaded by Derzno - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:19, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A beautiful and serene scene which makes that bridge look really pretty and stand out because it’s the only colourful element. --Aristeas (talk) 15:32, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Convincing composition and contrast. Beautiful. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:34, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 16:38, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support my favourite --Ermell (talk) 17:04, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's beautiful, but unfortunately chroma noise, lack of sharpness, missing focus on the right... --A.Savin 18:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:32, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:50, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and in spite of the technical issues correctly mentioned above. Cmao20 (talk) 19:49, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas, --GRDN711 (talk) 02:35, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:38, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd like the bridge (and only the bridge) to be a bit sharper, but other than that it's just beautiful! --El Grafo (talk) 09:09, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support (I wish, the aperture would by something like f/8.) --XRay 💬 12:27, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The colorful bridge in the mostly black & white context (though the reeds also have a little color) is really what makes this composition irresistible. I don't find the mild noise or lack of pinpoint sharpness disqualifying in this context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:52, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tempered support The pleasing symmetry and mood are enough to offset the technical imperfections noted. Daniel Case (talk) 06:14, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support quite a colourful image. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 16:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very special, in cases like this quality issues can be overseen Poco a poco (talk) 19:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment (Overlooked. "Overseen" means "supervised." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC))[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:07, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:36, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Cathedral of Mallorca - entrance.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2022 at 15:28:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
Info created & uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:28, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nicely framed photo (between the two lampposts) that shows the grandiose architecture of the entrance very well. At first the distorted statues in the top corners disturbed me but it's always the case when photographing architecture that you can only stand so far back and you have to make compromises to get everything in the frame, overall that's OK for me. Cmao20 (talk) 19:51, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I also hesitated because I was unsure about the distortions. But Cmao20 has explained it clearly, thank you. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:22, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love how T meltzer makes good use of the wide angle and how the converging lines turns an otherwise simple picture into a great one (in my view of course). - Benh (talk) 08:51, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:59, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Great shot, but there are some subtleties that make it look somewaht awkward to me. 1) The perspective has been over-corrected to the point that verticals are actually leaning out at the edges of the frame. That is amplified by all those clues in the image that tell me that I'm actually close to the building looking upwards (e.g. I can see the undersides of the platforms the statues stand on), suggesting that those verticals should actually converge at least a little bit towards the top for them to be credible. Just to be clear: I'm OK with some things in the corners being somewhat distorted (that is impossible to avoid here) – it is the way how they are distorted that does not work for me. 2) The textures of surfaces look soft, while high-contrast edges are close to being over-sharpened. --El Grafo (talk) 09:08, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:26, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Well composed image. But in my point of view the effect of very heavy perspective correction speaks against FP. --August Geyler (talk) 20:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The issues noted by El Grafo can be corrected, I think, and do not ruin the image too much for me. Daniel Case (talk) 17:20, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Per August and I don't see a factor compensating that (an extraordinary subject or special lighting), sorry, Poco a poco (talk) 19:16, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per El Grafo. --Yann (talk) 19:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:35, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Doors

File:Dal Lake Hazratbal Srinagar.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2022 at 18:35:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info created by Sofisuhail007 - uploaded by Sofisuhail007 - nominated by Hulged. Hulged (talk) 18:35, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Composition is fine but the picture is very noisy and there are white halos around the people at the right -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:23, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have the same reaction. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:36, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I wouldn't say it's *very* noisy. A bit more than I'd like, but still FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 03:43, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality problems stated above -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:17, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose Very serene mood, but per quality issues noted by others. Daniel Case (talk) 04:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:33, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Golden Ears seen from the Viewpoint Beach.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2022 at 15:18:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia
Info created and uploaded by The Cosmonaut. This photo has already been nominated and promoted in May 2021, but by an unfortunate side effect of our clean-up work after the Livio/Commonists affair I had to remove the FP label after re-evaluation of the votes. Re-nominated by --Aristeas (talk) 15:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A beautiful panomara. At the first glance the clouds seem a bit distracting, but as Buidhe has explained on the first nomination, the clouds accurately represent common weather in the Pacific Northwest, and they are flanking the central peak nicely. --Aristeas (talk) 15:18, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Aristeas'/Buidhe's points of view has convinced me. Special atmosphere thanks to the cloud structures. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:39, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sure they're common, but the result isn't a great composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:40, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it Buidhe (talk) 20:51, 9 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain : thank you for the nom, Aristeas. Given the circumstances, it would be better if I abstained. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:25, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my previous vote. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:30, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the clouds and the colours Cmao20 (talk) 19:48, 10 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:39, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:29, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Reiterated support Daniel Case (talk) 06:09, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. ··· 🌸 Rachmat04 · ☕ 16:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --GRDN711 (talk) 18:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:37, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia

File:Plum blossom at Istanbul.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2022 at 18:59:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
Info created by Jelican9 - uploaded by Jelican9 - nominated by Jelican9 -- Jelican9 (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jelican9 (talk) 18:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice composition but IMO insufficient sharpness on the flowers and also uncorrected chromatic aberration. Cmao20 (talk) 03:44, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Background is distracting and white balance feels a little off. Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:34, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:20200222 FIS NC COC Eisenerz PRC HS109 Men Jakob Eiksund Saethre 850 4504.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 14:09:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created by Granada - uploaded by Granada - nominated by Granada (talk) 14:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral as author -- Granada (talk) 14:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very dramatic picture but the left crop is extremely tight. Cmao20 (talk) 15:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination— Preceding unsigned comment added by Granada (talk • contribs)

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Domestic duck waving its wings and shaking the head at golden hour in a pond in Don Det Laos.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2022 at 04:27:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Anas
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:27, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support unusual --Ermell (talk) 09:52, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual and fascinating. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:22, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:16, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:02, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good idea for a photo Cmao20 (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:40, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Anas

File:Архитектурный комплекс Даргавс.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2022 at 02:50:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#Russia
Info The 'City of the Dead', a late medieval necropolis outside the village of Dargavs in North Ossetia. I have nearly nominated a couple of other photos of this interesting place before but this is the first one that I am convinced has the sufficient wow-factor for FP. created by Vladimir Pankratov - uploaded by Vladimir Pankratov - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 02:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 02:50, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The clouds induce an appealing dramatic atmosphere -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:21, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great atmospheric shot of a place with a lot of Wow --Kritzolina (talk) 07:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 14:55, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support But please remove the dust spot (see note) --Llez (talk) 16:42, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special atmosphere in a special place. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:28, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:10, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:54, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 05:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:54, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:03, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the beehive roofs. They make me, in a roundabout way, think of Utah. Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment too dark. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:53, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Russia

File:Rose O'Neill - When We All Believe (Santa Claus and children illustration from the 1903 December 2 issue of Puck).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2022 at 09:34:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Printed#Magazine_and_newspaper_illustrations_in_color
Info created by Rose O'Neill - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pleasant, great restoration. --Yann (talk) 18:59, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fantastic image quality! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:40, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:50, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely Cmao20 (talk) 03:46, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Shame you couldn't have finished this last month. Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Daniel Case: Well, the Christmas slot for POTD is still open for this year. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  Oh, wait. Well, 2023 it is! Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:19, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Printed#Magazine_and_newspaper_illustrations_in_color

File:Baltimore oriole in GWC (21861).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2022 at 17:52:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Icteridae_(Icterids)
Info A female or immature male (very hard to distinguish) Baltimore oriole during golden hour. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:52, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:52, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:36, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:16, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support You've gotten even better. That's really superb! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:38, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:45, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful bird and very sharp photo Cmao20 (talk) 03:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Icteridae_(Icterids)

File:Great blue heron in GWC (21718).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2022 at 18:01:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea
Info A great blue heron (Ardea herodias) on a frozen pond during golden hour. I saw it on the pond, where it appeared to be hunting, so I watched it for a while hoping for a shot of it breaking through the ice. Alas, it never did, but it did walk into the sunlight, where for a few moments it was brightly lit atop the darkest part of the ice. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:01, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Once more a great capture from ornithological paradise NYC :) -- Radomianin (talk) 19:35, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:31, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:52, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:37, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:54, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:45, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~~Full~~ Strong support ~~despite a very tight crop at the right.~~ Amazing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support exactly per Basile Cmao20 (talk) 03:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 05:17, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:25, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought at first "How can it be walking on the water? Is it Bird Jesus?" then I remembered that it has been rather, uh, chill around here lately and figured it out. Daniel Case (talk) 21:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I've uploaded a new version. The right crop has been bothering me, and was noted by a couple people above. Since it's just dark ice, I took the liberty of adding some space to the right in Photoshop. I was happy with the results, so decided to upload it despite the original receiving a lot of support already. Pinging all past participants, in case there are objections. @Martin Falbisoner, Daniel Case, Cayambe, Vulphere, GRDN711, Cmao20, Basile Morin, Schnobby, Iifar, Agnes Monkelbaan, Poco a poco, Ikan Kekek, Ermell, Llez, IamMM, Johann Jaritz, The Cosmonaut, Tournasol7, and Radomianin: (sorry about the mass ping). — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:04, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the ping, the slight extension to the right completes the picture a bit more. Thanks for your retouching work :) -- Radomianin (talk) 22:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Improved. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:57, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Even more better.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 04:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea

File:2018-10-22 TV, ARD, Cast -Rote Rosen- Staffel 16 IMG 1935 LR10 by Stepro.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2022 at 02:03:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Standing people
Info Lara-Isabelle Rentinck, German actress in front of a mirror, created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support -- Stepro (talk) 02:03, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great composition, but the sharpness is on her right shoulder. --Granada (talk) 06:28, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice portrait. --Yann (talk) 11:18, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little bit soft at full size but nice composition and overall good quality Cmao20 (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too soft, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice portrait. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:21, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Ikan, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 19:15, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful weak oppose Just too soft in the face, per Ikan ... the eyelash is a real dealbreaker. No less beautiful to look at, though. Daniel Case (talk) 21:52, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 04:30, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:29, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan --Tagooty (talk) 16:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 09:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aclyvolva lanceolata 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 07:10:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Ovulidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Really beautiful shell. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:59, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:45, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 15:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special shape and color -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 09:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Family : Ovulidae

File:Non-Biting Diptera Midge Larva.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 07:53:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera
Info created & uploaded by KarlGaff - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 07:53, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:21, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love it! I don't fully understand the caption, though, and I think it may need some editing. I'll start a discussion on the file's talk page. But absolutely an FP! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:30, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ooooh. A fine Rainbow gummywormus specimen. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
+1 Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:45, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 15:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fascinating at full resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:32, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 05:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support after reading the discussion on the talk page. --Cayambe (talk) 09:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile and Cayambe -- Radomianin (talk) 13:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 19:30, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:50, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:33, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera

File:Étang de Thau and Sète.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2022 at 12:44:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#France
Info created - uploaded - nominated by me. -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 12:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 12:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:04, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice and peaceful, but with more of the visual weight below the horizon than above, I don't think putting the horizon exactly in the middle makes sense. Some of the sky can be cropped. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:33, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@King of Hearts: ok, you may be right, I uploaded a cropped version but I am not very favorable to cutting much more so if you wish a more cropped version, you may use the crop tool and propose it as alternative. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:36, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:44, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Imho, the new crop is an improvement. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:15, 11 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry I'm voting against nominations tonight, but while I find the rocks interesting to a point, as a composition, this is pretty static to me, in part because while the sky is pleasant per se, not that much is happening in it formally, and this is echoed by the water. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan Kekek. Sterile look --Yeriho (talk) 16:20, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per KoH. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:20, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:24, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Rocks and reflection are interesting, yes, but the dull sky is a letdown (to be a little fair, it does show us that a good winter seascape is possible without much (if any) snow or ice). Daniel Case (talk) 21:59, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 21:01, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I scrolled past this a few times before taking a closer look, and the more I look at it the more I like it. It's kind of a minimalist landscape, with some nice textures and color. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 04:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Rhododendrites. --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:21, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Settlements#France

File:Skyer over Nørre Snede ved solnedgang.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 14:23:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
Info created by Villy Fink Isaksen - uploaded by Villy Fink Isaksen - nominated by Villy Fink Isaksen -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sunsets are beautiful but very common in FPC, I think there should be some special element to improve wow factor --Wilfredor (talk) 19:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, very beautiful but doesn't stand out from the many sunset photos on Commons and also resolution is not that high. Cmao20 (talk) 07:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 13:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:White throat Kingfisher Uthandi TN Feb21 D72 19860.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 12:46:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Alcedinidae_(Kingfishers)
Info created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 12:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Focus on head missed. Not as good as existing FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Charles is right.--Ermell (talk) 21:22, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I love the composition and the background but Charles' criticism is correct. Cmao20 (talk) 07:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the feedback. --Tagooty (talk) 15:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Avril de Sainte-Croix - Restored, cropped.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 14:19:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Henri Manuel - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A good portrait. I can't tell if the notebook she's looking at is supposed to be/look blank (as an author about to write), or if it was just overexposed. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'm less certain the more I look, but, in the whole, I'd presume overexposed given a few other photos from around the period I've seen which have multiple exposures, some with near-readable text, some with apparently blank pages. 1920s cameras were in some ways a step down from the Victorian ones in fidelity - mitigated as they didn't require you to literally strap yourself to a pole to keep still long enough for the exposure - and the book pages are by far the lightest-coloured object in the image. But, y'know, we have to judge by the cameras of the time. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:35, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question What were the dimensions of the original, Adam? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:42, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ikan Kekek: Afraid it's not stated, but the uncropped version has handwriting and you can probably get a rough visual estimate from that. I'd say maybe around A5 as cropped? Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:41, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done, as always, Adam! --Aristeas (talk) 09:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:59, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Dernekamp, Wirtschaftsweg -- 2021 -- 9407.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 15:18:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 15:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 15:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:13, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like this photo, liked it when I saw it at QIC and might vote for it, but I'd like some comments on why this is an FP when similar photos have had failed nominations here. Sorry, it would be way too difficult for me to find those nominations, but I remember comments like "just a winter road". -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support For me a winter road well-captured and in a well-composed photograph is a sufficient subject for FP, but I like this one in particular because of the contrast between the pristine snow and the final red leaves of autumn, as well as the mist in the distance and the trees growing together that makes the road look like a tunnel between the trees - it has a real fairytale atmosphere. Cmao20 (talk) 03:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support To be clear, I like it, too. I'll try to remember to ask this question again when there's a nomination I find similar that's getting dismissed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --GRDN711 (talk) 05:13, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 06:07, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual depiction of winter. --Tagooty (talk) 09:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is lovely! --PierreSelim (talk) 09:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support according to Cmao's convincing description. Wonderful pretty motif! -- Radomianin (talk) 13:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --August Geyler (talk) 23:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Traumhaft. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:14, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:26, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 10:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:37, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 20:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:15, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like a great scenic design to me. --Aristeas (talk) 09:27, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia

File:Ectophasia crassipennis male - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 14:43:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Family_:_Tachinidae_(Tachina_Flies)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 14:43, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 14:43, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 15:14, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 15:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:04, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Light and quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! --Tagooty (talk) 03:34, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:51, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:28, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 12:24, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:48, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 16:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:15, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Family_:_Tachinidae_(Tachina_Flies)

File:Wiesentheid St.Mauritius Decke-20210321-RM-161740.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 20:48:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Germany
Info The ceiling of the Mauritius Church is actually a painting and a good hatchet game for trompe l'oeil. Therefore, especially in the corners, the lines are not as straight as you would expect.. All by Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:48, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support This is an amazing picture and I was going to nominate it soon. Cmao20 (talk) 03:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:33, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:43, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:19, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of the most beautiful trompe l’œil church ceilings I have ever seen. --Aristeas (talk) 09:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:58, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:16, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Germany

File:Gusano de fuego (Hermodice carunculata), Cynthiana, Pafos, Chipre, 2021-12-11, DD 18.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 22:12:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Polychaeta
Info Bearded fireworm (Hermodice carunculata) of an aprox. length of 10 centimetres (3.9 in), Cynthiana, Paphos, Cyprus. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The composition is really good in this one Cmao20 (talk) 03:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The image you have nominated is good but the lighting in another Hermodice carunculata image - File:Gusano de fuego (Hermodice carunculata), Madeira, Portugal, 2019-05-31, DD 45.jpg, that you took in Portugal (already an FP in both Wikipedia and Commons) seems more attractive to me. I would be willing to consider having two FPs of this same species if there was a further convincing case for this nomination. --GRDN711 (talk) 04:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I haven't even mentioned that nomination because yes, it is the same species and it is the same author, but completely different photographic sessions, countries, environments, time of the year and so on. We have tons of other examples of several FPs of the same species/subject. I also estimate that the other FP was between 5-10 m deep, this one (I just checked my diving computer) is 25 m deep. What I enjoy mostly of this version is the detail of the head Poco a poco (talk) 09:15, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Fair point. --GRDN711 (talk) 21:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is both impressive and beautiful - Benh (talk) 09:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:36, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:31, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Could something be done about the CA in spots? Support now Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, sure, no problem, I oversaw that, will fix that this evening and upload a new version, --Poco a poco (talk) 07:59, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Daniel Case Done Poco a poco (talk) 16:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:57, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:10, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals#Class_:_Polychaeta

File:Indian Pond Heron Perched Shrubs Veinthaan TN Jan22 D72 22258.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 04:42:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardeola
Info Indian pond heron or paddy bird (Ardeola grayii), perched in shrubs in Veinthaan Pond, Tirunelveli, TN, India. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 04:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Shows the heron in its environment, bright green plants contrasting the brown feathers, algae on its legs. -- Tagooty (talk) 04:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much better than your other nomination because the bird is in focus. I wish the resolution were higher but I agree that a photo of the bird in its natural environment deserves to be FP and I like the composition Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Are the legs too green? In particular, there's a big green spot on the bird's left leg. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:02, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: The green is algae from the surface of the pond. It is visible also at the base of the bill. Part of the motif of "heron in its environment". More prominent in this Night heron with algae on legs and bill taken in the same location. --Tagooty (talk) 02:48, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Understood. Thanks for the explanation. This is a very good photo of the heron, and the only question for me is what I think of the depiction of the background. I won't oppose and might support, but I do think this is a good picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:20, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 10:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good focus,frame and capture. Capturing a heron in specially its habitat is what adds a lot of authenticity to the image. --Navneetsharmaiit (talk) 13:25, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:29, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I'd expect to feel the background is distracting, but it isn't. Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Daniel Case. --Aristeas (talk) 08:11, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:32, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:44, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardeola

File:Long-tailed tit Gennevilliers 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 15:16:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Aegithalidae (Long-tailed Tits)
Info Long-tailed tit on a twig. All by Alexis Lours. -- Alexis Lours (talk) 15:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 15:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cute feather ball :) -- Radomianin (talk) 18:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:58, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 22:47, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:13, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful light -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:51, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 08:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:34, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:38, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - --GRDN711 (talk) 21:07, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support cute — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:09, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow --Stepro (talk) 16:35, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:25, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Aegithalidae (Long-tailed Tits)

File:Nevicando al Bombone - Rignano sull'Arno.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2022 at 13:32:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Natural_phenomena#Snow
Comment Intense snowfall at Bombone in Rignano sull'Arno on 9 January 2022
Info created, uploaded, and nominated by (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 13:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 13:32, 12 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I really like the way this makes me feel in the middle of the snowstorm. I'd like someone else to judge whether there's any CA; if there isn't, I will support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:30, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment To be specific, I believe I see chromatic aberration on the building on the right. If there is, you should fix it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC):* Done I corrected. I am happy that this photo has given you emotion. Thank you and good day.(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 07:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)PROPOLI87(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 07:55, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I corrected. I am happy that this photo has given you emotion. Thank you and good day (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 11:23, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Chromatic aberrations, blurry, and (as usual unfortunately) no embedded color profile (Windows and Mac browsers and apps treat the colors randomly). Apart from these technical issues, I don't see anything great in this image (composition, subject, light). To be frank it looks more like a snapshot I would take with my smartphone from my window a snowing day -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:50, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:18, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support To me, this is really dynamic. If your snapshots are this good, Basile, I'd like to see some, at least at QIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:00, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but I agree with Basile, the picture evokes the snowstorm nicely but the composition and quality are a fair way short of FP. Cmao20 (talk) 18:43, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose I love the drivenness of the snow—no other picture in our "Snowing in ..." categories captures it so well—but the background is too distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CommentAware that my photos are not perfect, every now and then I plan something that I consider to be a new element for FP.FP is full of beautiful but very repetitive images and above all static (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 08:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)PROPOLI87(⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 08:51, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schloss Marienburg im herbstlichen Abendlicht.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 19:20:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created and uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 19:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Colours and framing are well composed. --August Geyler (talk) 23:48, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clear FP, beautiful subject at a beautiful time of year Cmao20 (talk) 01:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking view -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:52, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, what an atmosphere! -- Radomianin (talk) 07:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:27, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 08:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:33, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 12:23, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:39, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:58, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 18:09, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - --GRDN711 (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:18, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great light and mood. (It’s the same “a little birthday present” castle from which we already got that interior FP ;–).) --Aristeas (talk) 10:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 16:34, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hulged (talk) 04:25, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:14, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:31, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hynobius fossigenus.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 21:52:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians in new Section "Family : Hynobiidae (Asiatic Salamanders)"
Info created by Hisanori Okamiya, Hirotaka Sugawara, Masahiro Nagano, Nikolay A. Poyarkov; uploaded by Mr. Fulano - nominated by Lupe
Support as nominator -- Lupe (talk) 21:52, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sharp, interesting and useful picture but the resolution is very low; at 2.3 megapixels it barely meets the minimum 2 megapixel criteria, and for me this means it falls short of the standard for animal photos nowadays. Cmao20 (talk) 02:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Underexposed and low resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:55, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others – not an outstanding image. Try Commons:Valued Images instead. --Kreuz schnabel 18:02, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Waves & sun Porto Covo January 2022-1a.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2022 at 00:17:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural_phenomena#Sun
Info Heavy surf at Porto Covo, Portugal. One more risky nomination (the ones I prefer). Before quickly discarding with a all sunsets are pretty (or similar), please see the detail of the reflections and waves breaking, and the structure of the sea surface. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 00:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a big light spot in my eyes, sorry I don't see anything more -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:58, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:17, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Personally I find the light quite magical Cmao20 (talk) 18:50, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice but not great to me, overall. I'd like the composition better if the sun were in the center, but I know that's controversial here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:39, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H 15:37 January 2022 (UTC)
Oppose I appreciate the details you wanted us to, but I think that a smaller crop around the sun would more effectively capture them, and we can't do that from this image because it would be too small. Daniel Case (talk) 03:08, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bloemknoppen van een vlier (Sambucus serenade). 14-04-2021 (actm.) 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2022 at 18:37:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Adoxaceae
Info This picture was previously FP but has had its star removed following the recent Commonists sockpuppet incident. I think it still deserves to be FP, the only opposition votes last time seemed to accuse it of having 'low wow-factor' but honestly I find it just as impressive as other photos in the category. I like the composition (with the angle of the diagonal branch echoing the angles of some of the shapes in the background), also the nice contrast between the green and purple leaves, I think the bokeh on the background is very good, and overall I think a sharp and well-composed focus stack is hardly a 'common image' as the oppose votes stated last time. Created by Agnes Monkelbaan - uploaded by Agnes Monkelbaan - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:37, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support according to nomination text. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:31, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:05, 13 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yep. It sure does deserve the star. I'm not sure why I didn't vote on the previous nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:31, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 04:08, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:38, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:34, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 21:19, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support again. Daniel Case (talk) 17:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 20:57, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 09:09, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much for the nomination of my photo.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:49, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The purple parts make it interesting Lupe (talk) 12:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:42, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Adoxaceae

File:Mekong bank seen from the bridge between Don Det and Don Khon Laos at sunrise - Western view.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2022 at 04:14:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Laos
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:14, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:14, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:53, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral very nice but the 1/3 bottom entirely in shadow don't help IMO. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:34, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:09, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:32, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support. Magical light, colors, and clouds. I wish the composition were a bit more engaging (it currently feels a bit distant), but overall this is still an FP to me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. Concerning the composition, if I was the "painter" of this landscape, I would have placed the clouds lower in the image, but I had to take them as they came in reality :-) and made my best to deal with the situation -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I agree with Christian Ferrer and KoH. It's beautiful but with a little crop from the bottom it may become more catchy. -- IamMM (talk) 06:09, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reviews. I prefer not to crop to keep a fair balance between the upper and lower parts, still I agree the bottom is in the shadow. Nevertheless, a few minutes later the clouds became flatter, thus I think this moment was more appropriate -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely don't crop the bottom. Indeed, if only the clouds were a bit lower, we could crop some of the sky. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:40, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:32, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:48, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:03, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 21:25, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely composition and colours --Tagooty (talk) 03:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Beautiful light and colours and superb quality as usual but it feels almost as if the shadows have been lifted too much, as if there's no real areas of proper black in the photo, and therefore personally I think it looks a little lacking in contrast Cmao20 (talk) 03:45, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's nice to see so many photos from Laos coming up to FP. Laos is definitely not that well known for its landscapes, but the many photos by Basile Morin prove that wrong. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Exactly per above. I don't think Laos comes to mind first when one seeks a photography destination. I have been there quite a few times myself, and it's definitely not as easy as Basile makes it looks like. - Benh (talk) 09:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the positive feedbacks -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:23, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Mood makes it. Daniel Case (talk) 04:29, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and SHB2000. --Aristeas (talk) 09:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Laos

File:Yellow Bittern at Hyoko crop.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2022 at 22:53:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Family : Ardeidae (Herons)
Info created by Cp9asngf - uploaded by Laitche - nominated by Lupe -- Lupe (talk) 22:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator -- Lupe (talk) 22:53, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:31, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 06:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:04, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:20, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:46, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:25, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 05:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:29, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Family : Ardeidae (Herons)

File:2021-01-15 Eberspächer Luge World Cup Oberhof 1DX 4602 by Stepro.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 08:21:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info Portrait of sunshiny US-luger Ashley Farquharson, created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support -- Stepro (talk) 08:21, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ezarateesteban 12:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Something different. --Ermell (talk) 21:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 04:58, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 05:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Ermell. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:51, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Granada (talk) 12:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:38, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support High-quality, and it's nice to see her exuberance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:01, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:12, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's not how you look, it's how you luge. Daniel Case (talk) 04:37, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:38, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women

File:Common pathfinder (Pardaleodes edipus) underside.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 11:45:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Hesperiidae (Skippers)
Info Head to wingtip about 13mm. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:45, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent image --Tagooty (talk) 13:47, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:43, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:01, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:23, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 05:19, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:49, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:08, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful and sharp, especially when we consider the tiny size. --Aristeas (talk) 10:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:53, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:14, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:48, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:41, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:37, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Hesperiidae (Skippers)

File:Common yellow gilder (Cymothoe egesta egesta) underside 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 12:59:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info A large forest-dwelling butterfly. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:58, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. What's it eating? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

overripe banana. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:10, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It could be worthwhile to mention that in the file description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:06, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:59, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The eye looks unnatural to me, to much processing there IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 22:24, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No processing on the eye. Just checked the RAW file Poco a poco. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If I am wrong, I Support then Poco a poco (talk) 19:11, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. Cmao20 (talk) 07:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:10, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:32, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 12:20, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:40, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:26, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 22:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:15, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:37, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)

File:Canadian Pond Weed Leaf Tip.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2022 at 20:59:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
Info created & uploaded by KarlGaff - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 20:59, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:56, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works for me as an abstract artwork ;–). No kidding, it’s also exciting to see the structure of the plant in extreme magnification. There is no gallery section yet for the Hydrocharitaceae family; I will create it if this photo gets featured. --Aristeas (talk) 10:26, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:54, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:45, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support So are those green things chloroplasts? Daniel Case (talk) 19:26, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they should be. Kruusamägi (talk) 07:33, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:30, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:28, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Hydrocharitaceae

File:Cross Country Class 220 Voyager Kings Sutton - Banbury.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 17:40:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 17:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 17:40, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 01:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice golden evening light under dark clouds. --Aristeas (talk) 14:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hulged (talk) 04:24, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:39, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 05:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:52, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:34, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:53, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:27, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:18, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Golden hour + dark clouds always works well. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:00, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:2018-11-24 Women's World Cup at 2018-19 Luge World Cup in Igls by Sandro Halank–372.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 21:44:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual snow sports
Info Women's World Cup race at the 2018/19 Luge World Cup in Innsbruck-Igls: Natalie Geisenberger; created, uploaded and nominated by Sandro Halank -- Sandro Halank (talk) 21:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sandro Halank (talk) 21:44, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:24, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 04:57, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 05:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:14, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:05, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Granada (talk) 12:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:36, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 16:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:28, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:27, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:18, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Individual snow sports

File:Castle of Annecy 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2022 at 21:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 21:29, 14 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:12, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:30, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:51, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:16, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:18, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:11, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:56, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:46, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 21:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting time of the day, nice mirror image -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:49, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:11, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:53, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Michielverbeek (talk) 08:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC) Per Karelj --Michielverbeek (talk) 08:03, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:24, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Karelj --GRDN711 (talk) 21:15, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support And just as Annecy gets into the news again briefly ... Daniel Case (talk) 22:05, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. Maybe it could do with a little bit more contrast … But that’s nitpicking ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:17, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:55, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 15:30, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:08, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Richard-Wagner-Strasse 2 in Bayreuth (2).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2022 at 11:04:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Good picture in very dull light. I'm not understanding why this is a great picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:31, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan Kekek. -- Karelj (talk) 15:49, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Also per Ikan --Michielverbeek (talk) 16:35, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 07:45, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Esslingen aN - Altstadt - Altes Rathaus - nördlicher Giebel und Glockenspiel mit Abendsonne.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2022 at 07:46:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info Sharp, colourful and striking, this seems like a beautiful motif and very well-photographed. created by Aristeas - uploaded by Aristeas - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 07:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 07:46, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:03, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 11:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great. It evokes me the architecture of Indian temples -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:43, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much, Cmao20, for the nomination and all of you for your support! --Aristeas (talk) 14:39, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 16:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:50, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:56, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:07, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support though a little bit tight on the top. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:29, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:06, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Georges Rochegrosse - Poster for Gabriel Fauré's Pénélope (1913).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2022 at 12:01:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Georges Rochegrosse - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:01, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 12:12, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! Do you know the opera? How is it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- It's not performed much nowadays. It sounds pretty, and can be quite daring, and often fails to do the expected, but how well it works as a whole on stage I cannot say. Adam Cuerden (talk) 12:04, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan, you can watch the whole opera on YouTube. Most people forget how many classic works are available there. It's always worth doing a search. --Cart (talk) 17:59, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but I also was interested in Adam's opinion about it. Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Do plan to try to watch the whole opera version, but I find one performance is hard to judge a piece on once it reaches a certain level. I've heard terrible recordings of pieces I like, and wonderful productions of pieces that probably didn't deserve them. Biggest thing with opera are the scenes you can't pull off well nowadays, like how the big march from Aida often falls flat in performances that can't afford the original "throw money at it" staging. You have to get fairly close to an opera to properly judge. And a recording isn't quite theatre. Especially with my sound system. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:51, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of course that's true. I've played and been to many operas over the years, and my girlfriend is an operatic mezzo-soprano. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:34, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:13, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:58, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 14:42, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:30, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good reproduction. --Aristeas (talk) 18:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:10, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:29, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:06, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera

File:Kokardenblume (Gaillardia aristata) Raureif-20211221-RM-105242.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 10:08:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Family_:_Asteraceae_(Sunflowers)
Info Seed stand of a cocklebur with hoarfrost. Focus stack of 9 frames. All by Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 10:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 10:08, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 10:17, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Frozen life, beautiful. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:49, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:28, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:10, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:29, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:44, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 15:15, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 21:22, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support These ice crystals transform a faded flower into a splendid delicate object -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Best viewed in full size, doesn't look much in the thumbnail but incredibly impressive work when you appreciate it fully Cmao20 (talk) 03:50, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:22, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 05:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:10, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:20, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Große Klasse! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:12, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:30, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:21, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:23, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:05, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales#Family_:_Asteraceae_(Sunflowers)

File:20200222 FIS NC COC Eisenerz PRC Ladies HS109 Annika Malacinski 850 3585.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2022 at 13:06:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait
Info created by Granada - uploaded by Granada - nominated by Granada -- Granada (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral as author. I always liked the reflection of the ski jumping hill in her sunglasses together with me as the photographer. -- Granada (talk) 13:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good light -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:45, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support And the reflection is really good because it shows her “workplace”. --Aristeas (talk) 14:50, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as Aristeas --Stepro (talk) 16:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 18:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 19:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:31, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas --IamMM (talk) 04:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 10:53, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:36, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:59, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sandro Halank (talk) 19:44, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:59, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait

File:Oriental honey buzzard Mudumalai Mar21 DSC01405.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2022 at 13:00:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Family_:_Accipitridae_(Buzzards,_Eagles,_hawks_and_Kites)
Info Oriental or Crested honey buzzard (Pernis ptilorhynchus). There are no FP's of genus Pernis, so I've linked to the Gallery for Family Accipitridae. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 13:00, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The bird blends into the dry season foliage, but stands out against the deep blue sky -- Tagooty (talk) 13:00, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Deep blue? Seems more purple. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:57, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
That sky looks more blue than purple to me.

https://www.colorhexa.com/6572ae

And technically, it is blue. Dimljacic (talk) 18:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Technically, it is not blue. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:25, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: I agree it is closer to purple. Shot with a Sony A7R3 at 1h45m before sunset. I used cloudy WB since there was a combination of sun and shade. --Tagooty (talk) 04:55, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Can you shoot RAW with your camera? You can then adjust WB in post-processing. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: Keep in mind that same color may look different on various devices. It's not the same on a phone and on a large computer monitor. Our color profiles are probably not the same. Screen resolutions neither.

And, when we're already talking about it...

https://www.colorhexa.com/6572ae - "Color description: Mostly desaturated dark blue"

https://encycolorpedia.com/6572ae - "Hexadecimal color code [...] is a shade of blue."

https://www.colorxs.com/color/hex-6572ae - "Color name blue yonder"

I repeat, it is technically blue.

If you still don't believe me, use a color picker, pick the sky color in that photo, copy and paste the hex code into your browser, and you'll get identical results as me.

Nevertheless, be it blue or purple, I like and support the image. Dimljacic (talk) 10:54, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The sky looks unnaturally purple on my calibrated display --Yeriho (talk) 18:28, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Read the reply above. --Dimljacic (talk) 10:55, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the feedback and support. In view of the comments, I will relook at the WB and resubmit the image later. --Tagooty (talk) 01:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Adelshausen St.Marien-20211007-RM-173029.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2022 at 06:37:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info created and uploaded by Ermell - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 06:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:37, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow, churchtower is also too much in the background --Michielverbeek (talk) 08:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nom. --Ermell (talk) 14:09, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The wow is in the contrast between the golden light and the stormy weather. Cmao20 (talk) 15:26, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 17:19, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michielverbeek. Also, the shadows in front are distracting. Coming a little earlier in the day would have helped. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:57, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:41, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The shadows provide my eyes with a helpful direction and movement toward the church. I think the picture is better with them than it would be without them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:00, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Very interesting and dramatic light. On the other hand shadows are, as GRDN711 stated, badly interfering with the church. --August Geyler (talk) 23:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)--August Geyler (talk) 23:42, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with GRDN711, sorry, Poco a poco (talk) 22:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per others. --Yann (talk) 22:14, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 10:18, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose First, the shadows of the trees on the church. Second, from this angle, it really looks like the church is mooning us. Daniel Case (talk) 18:06, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose could be better Lupe (talk) 16:11, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Esponja (Scalarispongia scalaris), Amphitheater, Pafos, Chipre, 2021-12-13, DD 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2022 at 22:20:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Phylum_:_Porifera
Info (Scalarispongia scalaris) of an approximate diameter of 15 centimetres (5.9 in), Amphitheater, , Cyprus. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:20, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:20, 15 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good and the sharpness is IMO good enough for a nearly 14mpx underwater picture Cmao20 (talk) 03:56, 16 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Havana - Cuba - 3658.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2022 at 09:46:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Standing_people
Info created by Jorgeroyan - uploaded by Jorgeroyan - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 09:46, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I haven’t got the slightest idea what’s supposed to be special, let alone outstanding, on this picture. --Kreuz schnabel 12:38, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Kreuzschnabel. --Dimljacic (talk) 13:41, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --August Geyler (talk) 14:31, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lupe (talk) 12:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others; I think it's time to withdraw this nomination. Daniel Case (talk) 18:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Humblefly.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2022 at 11:09:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Family: Bombyliidae (Bee Flies)
Info created by Dimljacic - uploaded by Dimljacic - nominated by Dimljacic -- Dimljacic (talk) 11:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Review the last version of this image, as the first one has quite a lot of artifacts. -- Dimljacic (talk) 11:09, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Many artefacts still in an image of limited definition. A better camera needed? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:25, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The camera can capture higher resolution pictures. Probably wrong settings? Dimljacic (talk) 22:49, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No camera/EXIF data, so cannot respond. Charlesjsharp (talk)

Oppose Technical issues aside, the background is extremely busy. Daniel Case (talk) 18:56, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice pic but quite a lot of JPEG artefacts and IMO the composition is not quite interesting enough for FP, cluttered background per Daniel Cmao20 (talk) 11:13, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Front view of a wooden footbridge over a lagoon, trees and mountains in Vang Vieng, Laos.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2022 at 03:08:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Laos
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this, though I don't really like the closest parts of the footbridge, which are unsharp and might perhaps be cropped out. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:56, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:24, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Crossing the bridge to enter the nature paradise :) Well balanced composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support despite the foreground center is oof. --Ivar (talk) 14:08, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:56, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:33, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:03, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:07, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:17, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 19:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 23:01, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:18, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yeriho (talk) 17:42, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:48, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The foreground is too prominent for me, but still very good Cmao20 (talk) 11:10, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lupe (talk) 13:55, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Fendt 828 IMG 4911.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2022 at 17:56:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles # Landvehicles
Info created by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 17:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 17:56, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Clearly tilted clockwise (visible in the sky and the electricity pylons in the background). Even without that, I’d say this is a straightforward QI of that machinery but not more to me, no wow. --Kreuz schnabel 15:05, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kreuz. I'd love for us to have an FP of a tractor like this, but while this image could probably sell a few it just doesn't sell itself as an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 07:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Fischer.H (talk) 09:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hazelnuts (Corylus avellana).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2022 at 14:12:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 14:12, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 14:12, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The multiple and variable strength shadows don't work for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:54, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:52, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done arrangement, high quality capture. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:18, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 11:34, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:53, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:34, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:17, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:01, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:14, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:39, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)

File:MV-22 Osprey after dark.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2022 at 07:27:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Tiltrotors
Info created by Cpl. Patrick King, USMC - uploaded by Abovfold - nominated by Abovfold -- Abovfold (talk) 07:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Abovfold (talk) 07:27, 18 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:23, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:38, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kolva (talk) 00:52, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:41, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:39, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Tiltrotors

File:Tetraodóntido (Torquigener flavimaculosus), Pistol Bay, Pafos, Chipre, 2021-12-12, DD 11.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2022 at 19:02:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Tetraodontidae_(Pufferfish)
Info Approx. 6 centimetres (2.4 in) long pufferfish (Torquigener flavimaculosus), Pistol Bay, Paphos, Cyprus. This pufferfish is native to the Western Indian Ocean but has emigrated to the Red and Mediterranean Seas. Their natural prey are crustaceans and mollusks that they crush with their four large teeth (which give name to the order Tetraodontiformes). As with many other puffers, this pufferfish has a symbiotic relationship with types of bacteria that produces tetradotoxin which is a powerful neurotoxin. Tetradoxin is found in their skin and internal organs like liver and is approximately 100 times more toxic than cyanide, what makes pufferfishes among the most poisonous vertebrates in the world. They are therefore highly toxic to most animals when eaten. Nevertheless, the meat of some species is considered a delicacy in Japan, Korea, and China when prepared by specially trained chefs who know which part is safe to eat and in what quantity. Furthermore one of the most known characteristics of pufferfishes is that they can inflate taking water or air an so multiply their size several times to avoid that they can be swallowed by predators. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:02, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Have you rotated it? Often a good idea, but the seabed looks tilted. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:24, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp: Yes, this image is rotated in ccw direction. Originally the puffer was looking up and the seabed had more inclination. If I take pictures over the surface I sometimes need to fix the tilt a bit, in worst cases 2 degrees, but underwater the tilt can be far from reality (10-20 degrees) when chasing subjects like this one. Long story short, I applied a tilt but it's hard to say how far from reality was the original tilt. Therefore I opted for having at least the subject horizontal. Poco a poco (talk) 22:09, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:08, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:18, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:32, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 08:31, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 14:00, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty in pink ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 16:49, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 18:33, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lupe (talk) 18:13, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:14, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent underwater image. --Tagooty (talk) 03:16, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:15, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 15:13, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish#Family_:_Tetraodontidae_(Pufferfish)

File:Camp Elephant Sitting TrunkOntusk River Mudumalai Mar21 A7C 00392.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2022 at 16:15:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Elephantidae_(Elephants)
Info Debonair camp elephant (Elephas maximus indicus, captive) relaxing after bathing in the Moyar River, Mudumalai Tiger Reserve, Tamil Nadu, India. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual pose with trunk slung over tusk. -- Tagooty (talk) 16:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not so keen on the ground tusks for an FP. Hope this captive elephant is treated well, some have a tough time, don't they? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:55, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: Appreciate your concern. The elephant camp in Mudumalai is one of the oldest in India. In the British era the elephants were used for logging. That was stopped many years ago, now the camp is used for rescue and rehabilitation of elephants. Most of the mahouts are tribals who have lived in these forests in harmony with elephants for centuries. Sacred Bond (teaser) is a forthcoming documentary of the bonding between a mahout couple and an orphaned baby elephant. --Tagooty (talk) 04:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The unusual pose notwithstanding, this doesn't really do much for me. Daniel Case (talk) 07:06, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the comments. --Tagooty (talk) 04:04, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Héron garde boeufs lac sud de Tunis.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2022 at 23:50:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Bubulcus
Info Found this while browsing Wiki Loves Earth winners. Impressed me with the composition and the sharpness of the bird at high (22mpx) resolution. No FPs of this species. created by El Golli Mohamed - uploaded by El Golli Mohamed - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:50, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:50, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:32, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:40, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 14:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:32, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 18:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:12, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:19, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:41, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Bubulcus

File:TR Yedigöller asv2021-10 img16.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Jan 2022 at 01:25:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Reflections
Info View of the Büyükgöl (Big Lake) in Yedigöller (Seven Lakes) National Park, Turkey ---- all by me --A.Savin 01:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 01:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This has a kind of luxuriance. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:22, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 05:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:15, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:29, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:52, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:16, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:04, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 14:37, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:48, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 16:34, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hulged (talk) 04:23, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:51, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:55, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 14:21, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Karelj. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Karelj. Autumn-color images reflected in still water under blue skies are like sunsets ... they can be done so well by so many photographers that we'd have to see one that made us feel like we'd never seen one before. This is very good but for me it doesn't clear that bar. Daniel Case (talk) 19:02, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:02, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:39, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Reflections

File:Museu Histórico de Brasília 3.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Feb 2022 at 07:50:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Brazil
Info created and uploaded by Fwsbsb2 - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 07:50, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:50, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose great idea - but insufficient quality (though I wonder why considering the settings) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:56, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination IamMM (talk) 16:24, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2021-02-13 IBSF World Championships Bobsleigh and Skeleton Altenberg 1DX 5060 by Stepro.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2022 at 13:54:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other team sports
Info IBSF World Championships Bobsleigh and Skeleton Altenberg 2021: Team Francesco Friedrich, Thorsten Margis, Candy Bauer, Alexander Schüller (GER) at the start; created, uploaded, and nominated by Stepro
Support --Stepro (talk) 13:54, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Granada (

talk) 14:04, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 15:59, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:17, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:55, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:35, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:30, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 18:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:20, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:35, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 03:15, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Other team sports

File:Green Sea Turtle. (17219615561).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Feb 2022 at 19:37:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Cheloniidae (Sea Turtles)
Info Green turtle (Chelonia mydas) at Laniakea Beach, Honolulu, Hawaii.
Image created by Bernard Spragg. NZ - uploaded by Howcheng - nominated by Lupe -- Lupe (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator. -- Lupe (talk) 19:37, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 20:05, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I really think we can do better than a small photo of a giant turtle. A much larger photo could have more details, and since the turtle is asleep and turtles can often be found sleeping in that area, there could have been plenty of time to get a nice big, detailed photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:53, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Background is also distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 05:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Nice photo but the horizon makes it looks like it is tilted, and the colour balance is a bit too cyan, I think. Still, wonderful motif and composition. Cmao20 (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice. But it looks like being tilted and the resolution is surprisingly low. --August Geyler (talk) 13:38, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lupe (talk • contribs)

File:Wind turbine near Kunda in Estonia.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2022 at 10:28:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Estonia
Info created by Sillerkiil - uploaded by Sillerkiil - nominated by Sillerkiil -- Sillerkiil (talk) 10:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sillerkiil (talk) 10:28, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a particularly interesting composition, sorry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:51, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan, I particularly don’t like the generator’s axis below the horizon, plus very poor quality at just 9 megapixels. --Kreuz schnabel 15:50, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality not good enough, composition not good enough for FP --XRay 💬 18:19, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sillerkiil (talk • contribs)

File:Cologne Museum Ludwig Roof at Dusk.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Feb 2022 at 16:29:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture#Germany
Info created and uploaded by Till.niermann - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 16:29, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:29, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm flattered by the nomination, but I think the shot isn't sharp enough for FP, also there is some serious noise. --Till (talk) 16:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Till for the honest technical comment. Respecting the photographer's opinion I withdraw my nomination. --IamMM (talk) 16:50, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Till: just wanted to say that mild quality issues aside, I really like this one. The patterns, the colors, and the icing on the cake: that person in just the right spot. Kudos! --El Grafo (talk) 12:29, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I appreciate it! --Till (talk) 17:14, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Gorzow katedra.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Jan 2022 at 09:32:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Poland
Info created by Lukaszmalkiewicz.pl - uploaded by Lukaszmalkiewicz.pl - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 09:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 09:32, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe it is a combination of several time exposures (no metadata). However, imo, it has a powerful wow. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:40, 20 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too queerly in my eyes. --Milseburg (talk) 16:33, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Certainly a matter of taste. I like the contrast of dynamics/movement (the trams in the foreground) with statics/persistence (the cathedral); this contrast is underlined by the contrasting colours. Photos of this kind are often mere snapshots (because some art photographers seem to think that having a good idea makes technical quality superfluous); but not this one, it is well-composed and the facade of the cathedral is sharp and crisp. Well done. --Aristeas (talk) 18:07, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I concur with Milseburg, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 19:16, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Might work if it were just the cathedral and the trams, there's some conceptual and aesthetic contrast there, but the overhead lines and the other details make it too busy. Daniel Case (talk) 06:24, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lupe (talk) 18:09, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically interesting, but per Milseburg, does not work for me as FP. --GRDN711 (talk) 23:14, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas, this is creative and well composed, I enjoy it a lot. Cmao20 (talk) 11:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose With Daniel Case. --August Geyler (talk) 13:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:45, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Village weaver (Ploceus cucullatus cucullatus) male with leaf.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2022 at 10:23:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)
Info IMO a really well-composed bird photo and the leaf in its mouth is an extra bonus. created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 10:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 10:23, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking colours, pose and sharpness. --Tagooty (talk) 16:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:40, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 18:59, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:00, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 15:20, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:38, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent as always. Daniel Case (talk) 22:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, great catch. Beautiful light -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:21, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:49, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:13, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)

File:Budgerigar- Mount Hope.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Feb 2022 at 15:54:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Psittaculidae_(True_Parrots)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 15:54, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:49, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really interesting. --IamMM (talk) 16:57, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lupe (talk) 17:54, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:26, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:37, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 22:58, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:15, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 12:51, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:04, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 17:15, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would make a good desktop ... Daniel Case (talk) 22:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, impressive texture! Per Daniel Case -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:25, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this would make a terrible desktop - way too busy for me ;-P --El Grafo (talk) 10:05, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 17:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 02:34, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Psittaculidae_(True_Parrots)

File:Black Spur, Yarra Ranges NP, Vic, Australia - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2022 at 08:02:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia#Victoria
Info created & uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:02, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Really great and atmospheric! -- Radomianin (talk) 08:57, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:19, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lupe (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support great color contrast and composition --Stepro (talk) 15:17, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! --Basotxerri (talk) 17:27, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can see here an episode of time travel of strangers things --Wilfredor (talk) 19:30, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 23:21, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting contrast between the natural and artificial. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:36, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per King of Hearts --Tagooty (talk) 03:12, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:28, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support just ... WOW! --El Grafo (talk) 09:57, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:37, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Light trails and sunlight ... a rare combination, and such a lovely setting for it. Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:43, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --August Geyler (talk) 13:37, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 17:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 05:11, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 14:53, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:56, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:17, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Australia#Victoria

File:Grey-crowned Babblers 1605.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Feb 2022 at 08:07:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family: Pomatostomidae (Australo-Papuan babblers) (title not existing yet)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:07, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 08:59, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:28, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. How often does it snow there? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Probably not a lot in late spring, anymore than it does here. Daniel Case (talk) 03:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support So beautiful. - Benh (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:39, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lupe (talk) 13:42, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 13:58, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support very cute --Stepro (talk) 15:15, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Composition compensates for less sharpness than usual. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:11, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:12, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:53, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 23:18, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting batch -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:34, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 15:24, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:38, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:46, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --August Geyler (talk) 13:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 17:52, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 05:10, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 17:02, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Like this image a lot but there are little white spots in the background that detract (dust in the air?). Image would be better if these spots were gone. --GRDN711 (talk) 06:54, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Snow, no? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:16, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:58, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:16, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:16, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family: Pomatostomidae (Australo-Papuan babblers)

File:Gespietste kastanje 13-01-2022. (d.j.b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Jan 2022 at 16:36:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Sapindaceae
Info Half of an impaled chestnut found on a forest trail. (The surface was probably pecked by birds). Focus stack of 41 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:36, 21 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:10, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:17, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, but nothing special for FP nomimation. -- Karelj (talk) 15:54, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 23:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:31, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:46, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:19, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:19, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 10:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:14, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Klaas `Z4␟` V: 11:13, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --August Geyler (talk) 13:33, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 15:20, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Sapindaceae

File:Snow geese flying up at Sacramento National Wildlife Refuge.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Feb 2022 at 03:55:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Anser
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:55, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Going the wrong way and the ones in the foreground are not in focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:51, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lacks the harmonious feel of the flock of budgies nominated down the page per Charles. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:44, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:57, 29 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ericushöft (Hamburg-HafenCity).08.12471.ajb.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2022 at 05:09:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created and uploaded by Ajepbah - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 05:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not my favorite type of architecture, but the composition with the reflections and kind of arc shape really works. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:27, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 11:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:56, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Michielverbeek (talk) 16:47, 22 January 2022 (UTC) A beautiful reflection and a good composition. The verticals are straight but it looks a bit deformed.[reply]
Support --per Ikan Kekek. Famberhorst (talk) 07:31, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 16:51, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:57, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support (But: Please remove the dust spot at the top of the building.) --XRay 💬 10:00, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Dust spots removed --Ajepbah (talk) 17:10, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:09, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain Good quality photo but I honestly don't like the motif or see it as interesting so I think it's best if I don't vote. Cmao20 (talk) 11:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Michielverbeek. Also subject of image is not anything special for FP nomination, IHMO. -- Karelj (talk) 15:11, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Subject of image is the historic quay wall 'Ericushöft' in the center (cultural heritage monument #12471). Not very spectacular, but IMHO quite remarkable in particular in contrast to the modern buildings on top ;-) --Ajepbah (talk) 17:29, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:49, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Georges Rochegrosse - Poster for the prèmiere of Claude Debussy and Maurice Maeterlinck's Pelléas et Mélisande.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Feb 2022 at 07:45:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Georges Rochegrosse - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:45, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:45, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done. --Aristeas (talk) 08:48, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, humongous! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:44, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ikan Kekek: Collaboration of sorts with my 2020 self. Back then, I got all the big damage done, which took so long I burned out, but meant when I came back this time, I didn't burn out and could finish it. It's such a foundational opera in the modern canon that it really deserved it. Though if you mean the image size? Actually slightly smaller than last week's Pénélope. I'd say more difficult, though. Phototypes are a pain, and phototypes with a thousand tiny rips? Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:24, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I meant the image size, and fantastic quality at that size! Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:31, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Would love to see the original painting, but I can't find any evidence it still exists. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:52, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a shame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 15:40, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 17:27, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:01, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:10, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:12, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:03, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:44, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:51, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera

File:Water wheel - Zell am Harmersbach 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jan 2022 at 09:06:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Machines
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:06, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:06, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:07, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:58, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:06, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 06:48, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:32, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:52, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not impressed with the lighting, a bit ordinary IMO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:58, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:18, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 05:25, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:22, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:59, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:16, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow to me, very normal --Wilfredor (talk) 19:36, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose same Lupe (talk) 21:12, 25 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Wilfredor. While the subject as such is nice, this it not an outstanding image of it. I just can’t see any inspired composition here: main subject centered, shrubbery on both sides cut off and partly covering the wheel, much uninteresting foreground. Taken closer at shorter focal length might have given a much more impressive shot. Foliage in background looks hopelessly overprocessed. --Kreuz schnabel 11:50, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose With King of Hearts. --August Geyler (talk) 13:36, 27 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Obstructing bush, hiding part of the subject. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:36, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bush is a part of composition. For me it's like saying that you cannot see the forest, because leaves are in the way. ℺ Gone Postal (〠 ✉ • ✍ ⏿) 09:51, 28 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very good image, but not special. --Tagooty (talk) 15:19, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:39, 30 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:50, 31 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Machines