Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2005

This is an archive for Commons:Featured picture candidates page debates and voting.
The debates are closed and should not be edited.

Image:Pico do Arieiro.jpg not featured[edit]

View from Pico do Arieiro, Madeira.

Nominate and support. —MRB 13:10, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. Greudin 10:50, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. The light blue background seems like an artificial color. Not very convincing IMO. villy 21:31, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Nice mountain and good sharpness and composition, but the sky is a weird color. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
@villy & Malene: Would you prefer the picture if I changed the color of the sky into a "normal" color by using Photoshop? Personally, I'm against such picture editing, but I think it's a pity if the picture wasn't chosen only because of the color of the sky (the mountain is the important part of the picture, not the background!). —MRB 11:13, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Yes then I would support it :-) --Malene 08:03, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support --Fanghong 02:09, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. It's laughable how people want to artifically alter the picture in make it appear more "natural" or "convincing." Neutrality 02:52, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose weird colors -- Aka 11:24, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Thomas G. Graf 18:02, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Darkone (¿!) 11:35, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Lemon.jpg featured[edit]

Yellow Lemon.

Nominate and support. --Atamari 21:12, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, nice colors, good sharpness 84.188.203.102 22:12, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. --Emuzesto 00:14, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. Christiaan 00:39, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. Also good lighting. --MarkSweep 03:14, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. Very good photo. --Mbcmf217 07:38, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. —MRB 09:04, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
weak Support nice colours, good sharpness - but nothing special -- Bernd Untiedt 10:47, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
support. So pro. Greudin 10:48, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. Nothing special, but technically perfect --Thomas G. Graf 13:16, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
- Comment: Nothing special! Come on fullas, lemons are glorious. Imagine life without them! :) —Christiaan 00:58, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --Lviatour 08:41, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --Norro 00:19, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --FoeNyx 20:28, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- nothing special, but taking "macro" photos is often tricky! David.Monniaux 17:51, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- at the first view I could feel the smell of citrus - they are "there". // Solkoll 21:27, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support FRESH'N'EXCITING --Schaengel89 @me 20:43, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support Mmmm, lemons. -- Infrogmation 14:49, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support, but I don't like lemons. --Heidas 12:05, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support -- Great lightning and composition Fabien1309 12:39, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Gambia_banjul_arch22.JPG not featured[edit]

"Arch 22" Photo from --Atamari 00:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC) on 24th February 2003 Banjul, Gambia.

Self-nomination, no vote. --Atamari 00:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose--Urban 07:19, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Weak Support. I like this photo, but there is that vehicle in the background. --Mbcmf217 07:38, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Skew, bad composition (the palm), too dark -- Bernd Untiedt 10:43, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, maybe to be recentered. Greudin 10:48, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Agree with Bernd --Thomas G. Graf 13:19, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose same argument as Bernd. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, agree with Bernd, Thomas and Malene. —MRB 09:42, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, I think it's grand and it has inspired me to do an article on Banjul. -- Ranveig 00:09, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. Not balanced IMO. villy 07:35, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I would support it if you would give Gimp a chance to put the columns really upright and I guess the arch has a really white color which would also require some color fixing. If this is done it is a nice image.
Oppose -> Bernd -- Aka 11:25, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Mairie de fort-de-france.jpg not featured[edit]

Townhall of Fort-de-France, in Martinique (Carribean Sea).

Nominate and support --Mbcmf217 07:54, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
oppose bad composition. --Bernd Untiedt 10:38, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. Terrible this mix of genres : typical palmiers + lampadaires so "métropolitain". Greudin 10:46, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, bad composition/perspective --Thomas G. Graf 13:17, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 21:29, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose same argument as Thomas. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose lamp and tower of the building are cut off. —MRB 09:30, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ranveig 22:00, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Norro 00:20, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --FoeNyx 20:28, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- bad perspective David.Monniaux 17:50, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- bad composition -- Aka 11:26, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose I don't like the cut lantern --norro 21:40, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Landsvale.jpg featured[edit]

Barn swallow, (Hirundo rustica).

Self-nomination, no vote, --Malene 21:19, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. --Emuzesto 09:54, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. very nice -- Bernd Untiedt 10:17, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Greudin 11:03, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, Thomas G. Graf 19:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support (so nice I had already saved it for my private collection) -- Ranveig 22:06, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Glad you like it :-) --Malene 08:03, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support Richardfabi 22:31, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, Lviatour 08:39, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, --Mbcmf217 10:48, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support - stuck it on the en.wikipedia article, would it be acceptable to remove the black line-frame? --Oldak Quill 18:46, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Since the pic is published under GFDL - you are welcome to change it :-) --Malene 22:40, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I uploaded a lossless crop of this image. Only one pixel needed to be cropped on each side, but due to the nature of JPEG compression, I had to crop eight pixels on the left and top. --MarkSweep 06:21, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --FoeNyx 20:28, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support —MRB 10:08, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Kaloe_daemning.jpg not featured[edit]

The dam, that leads to the ruins of Kalø Castle (Build in 1313), Denmark.

Self-nomination, no vote, --Malene 21:19, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Norro 00:21, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. villy 07:34, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Lviatour 12:28, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Thomas G. Graf 16:05, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose boring -- Aka 11:34, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Nothing special -- Bernd Untiedt 17:05, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Fortaleza-de-Sagres Padrão-de-Descobrimento.jpg not featured[edit]

Fortress in Portugal

Fortress in Sagres, Portugal: Monument of the discoveries period. Author: Lusitana

Support. villy 08:10, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC) (nominator)
Oppose--Urban 08:18, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Im not sure if it would be better if the pic was cropped a bit in the right side. I would have liked to se the flag more clearly. But still a nice pic :-) --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. Nice and bright. --Emuzesto 09:54, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Thomas G. Graf 19:52, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, --Mbcmf217 10:48, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --FoeNyx 20:28, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ranveig 17:24, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Aka 11:35, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose bad composition -- Bernd Untiedt 17:09, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Darkone (¿!) 11:38, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Saint Peter's Square from the dome.jpg featured[edit]

Self-nomination, no vote --Valyag 18:02, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ranveig 21:46, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --Malene 08:03, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- 80.15.216.196 05:21, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Urban 05:32, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --212.106.239.42 14:48, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 16:04, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Excuse me, but what exactly is wrong with this picture? -- Ranveig 21:05, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support -- Chris 73 05:52, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support but it can still be improved with post-processing -- Aka 11:37, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Solar_eclips_1999_4.jpg not featured[edit]

Solar eclipse in France 1999 Couronne

Self-nomination, no vote, -- Lviatour 08:02, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
~~Support~~ --Fanghong 02:06, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. villy 07:42, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ranveig 21:02, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Bernd Untiedt 17:38, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose it doesn't really look realistic Schaengel89 @me 21:11, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Solar_eclips_1999_5.jpg featured[edit]

Solar eclipse in France 1999 Protubérances

Self-nomination, no vote, -- Lviatour 08:11, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Christiaan 20:58, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 07:43, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support —MRB 10:11, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support--Fanghong 02:49, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Aka 11:38, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Bernd Untiedt 17:39, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:DuplexScaling.jpg featured[edit]

Nominate and support --Mbcmf217 10:25, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Weak Oppose A very, very nice picture, but i don't think, it's excellent for an encyclopedia --Norro 00:24, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Hey ! Here is Wikimedia Commons and not Wikipedia ! --Mbcmf217 12:04, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Ytou are compleely right. I'm sorry. Support Very nice picture --norro 01:45, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support --FoeNyx 20:28, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 07:32, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Urban 08:11, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support, nice colors. —MRB 10:14, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ranveig 21:08, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose The colors are more a riddle than nice and do not look natural to me. Moreover I have no idea what thing I'm looking at. So even if we are at WikiMedia here, images at this place should explain something instead of confusing people.
- I don't understand. Did you not read the image description page? It clearly says that it's the inside of a grand piano. I don't know what it means for the colors to be "a riddle" – it just looks like regular incandescent/Tungsten lighting to me. --MarkSweep 10:40, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support but it could be a little bit sharper (smaller aperture, tripod) -- Aka 11:42, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Lviatour 06:08, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose the display window is too small Schaengel89 @me 15:25, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bangkok Wat-Phra-Kaeo Kinnari.jpg not featured[edit]

selfnomination --Tsui 13:25, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --FoeNyx 20:28, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --Fanghong 02:04, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. I don't like the out-of focus statue on the left. -- Infrogmation 02:11, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. Cf. Infrogmation's comment. villy 07:32, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support —MRB 19:15, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Darkone (¿!) 11:44, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Schaengel89 @me 15:24, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:GrosHorloge détail11.JPG not featured[edit]

selfnomination -- Urban 05:37, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 13:36, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. Neutrality 02:52, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Aka 11:42, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose not sharp / nothing special -- Bernd Untiedt 17:25, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Rainforest_Fatu_Hiva.jpg not featured[edit]

Nominate and support --Mbcmf217 19:31, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
oppose : bad sharpness 84.188.226.163 18:21, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
oppose very blurred -- Aka 11:46, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
oppose : bad sharpness -- Lviatour 12:46, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
oppose : too much blur - Fabien1309 12:51, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, --Thomas G. Graf 17:43, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Pfau imponierend.jpg featured[edit]

Pavo cristatus - displaying. Author: BS Thurner Hof

Support. villy 10:15, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) (nominator)
Support Nice detail. —Christiaan 12:39, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Wonderful. Espescially because I know how difficult it ist to take such a photo. I tried to make a similare Photo. 84.188.226.163 18:18, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Greudin
Support -- Ranveig 21:10, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- this is the stuff they normaly use in camera comerials, I buy one =p // Solkoll 21:39, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose I like the colors and the details, but i don't think, the clipping is excellent. --norro 22:49, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Lviatour 12:47, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose: Agree with norro, Thomas G. Graf 18:01, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose cant see enough, the rest is missing --Schaengel89 @me 20:35, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Lapin blanc.jpg not featured[edit]

Self-nominate - Rabbit eating carrot - Author : Fabien1309 - 12:43, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support (the cuteness! the cuteness!) -- Ranveig 21:13, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support very, very cute -- Aka 11:47, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Don't like the background, or the shadow cast on it; appears a little contrived. Christiaan 18:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Lviatour 06:04, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ginkakuji04.jpg featured[edit]

Ginkaku-ji (???) ,Kyoto ,Japan in Winter.

Nominate --Shin-? T 05:02, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Weak oppose: The sky is as white as the snow which makes the snow much less impressive.
weak oppose overexposed -- Aka 11:49, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --Urban 16:29, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I don't like winter - but Support --Atamari 17:40, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support I like that --norro 21:36, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support - maybe a little overexposed, but I like the feel of japanese ink-paintings. --Tsui 22:08, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Infrogmation 15:04, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support -- FoeNyx 21:40, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support. It's not overexposed; the JPEG has full dynamic range. It's just a difficult, high-contrast scene, probably shot digitally or on slide film (low-contrast print film might have been better), and it's unfortunate that the snowy roof blends into the washed-out sky in one area. However, overall it's still an impressive picture. --MarkSweep 09:01, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Panorama Koblenz.jpg not featured[edit]

Nominate --Schaengel89 @me 17:03, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support I like the details in the big version. -- Infrogmation 18:01, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

support Greudin 09:13, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

oppose Not bad, but not exceptional good. Also problems with the stiching.(double flagstaffs) -- Bernd Untiedt 17:18, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oppose, Thomas G. Graf 13:17, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Oppose, too small.Darkone (¿!) 14:19, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

too small? t'is picture has 14,447,680 pixels with an amplitude of 2082 pixels and a height of 696 pixels! and you say, it's too small? Schaengel89 @me 15:22, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support--Fanghong 01:58, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Koeln Hohenzollernbruecke.jpg featured[edit]

Nominate and support Schaengel89 @me 18:43, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support —MRB 19:14, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support Greudin 09:11, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support Valyag 10:00, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support Dapete 13:50, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support, Thomas G. Graf 16:14, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support -- Bernd Untiedt 17:19, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support. villy 21:26, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support Darkone (¿!) 11:44, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support --Heidas 12:08, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Easter bunny.jpg[edit]

Self-nomination, no vote. --Aka 19:12, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support --Thomas G. Graf 15:11, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose nothing special -- Bernd Untiedt 22:13, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. The subject is unremarkable commercial kitch. The photo of it seems technically well done, almost enough to change my vote to neutral, but I can see nothing particularly interesting about the image to warrent featured status. -- Infrogmation 16:20, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, cf. Infrogmation's comment. —MRB 19:23, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Jcornelius 10:49, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - Nothing special - Fabien1309 17:38, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Iraqi man on Baghdad street.jpg not featured[edit]

An Iraqi man pauses for a photo on a Baghdad street near the main market, with an interesting looking man passing by in the background

Self-nominate and support Christiaan 15:48, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Pro looks nice Schaengel89 @me 16:44, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Jigokudani_hotspring_in_Nagano_Japan_001.jpg, featured[edit]

Nominate -- Japanese macaqu. by Yosemite 04:19, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC).
Oppose --norro 18:54, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Support Greudin 21:00, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 13:59, 28 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Support - there faces are (sorry) ugly, but the photo is quite good. --Thomas G. Graf 18:31, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Support — FoeNyx 01:19, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support funny Richardfabi 15:10, 1 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 07:24, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - though my favourite from this series is this one. --Tsui 11:19, 2 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Aka 09:12, 3 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Apollomelos 07:21, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support — WεFt 20:27, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Bernd Untiedt 23:25, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Lc95 08:07, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Ravn 13:19, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neutral - Don't like the colors (contrast) --Pabix 11:58, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support great photo --Lc95 09:32, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Promoted -- Infrogmation 14:39, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:StarAnise.jpg not featured[edit]

Nominate and support--Fanghong 04:27, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Comment: Needs diffuse light, and more light overall. --MarkSweep 05:55, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Thomas G. Graf 15:14, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 19:01, 27 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Manhattan1942.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support Apollomelos 07:07, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 08:21, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Schaengel89 @me 09:24, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —MRB 10:10, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
oppose bad quality -- Bernd Untiedt 23:32, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Aka 11:24, 7 Mar 2005 (UTC)
SupportHistory is offen "poor quality". --Just1pin 08:16, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Thomas G. Graf 18:37, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. It would be a great photo if it were sharp, but alas it isn't. Interesting historical photo, but I don't think of featured quality. -- Infrogmation 20:34, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose.--Fanghong 00:43, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support What is all this obsession over "quality"? I don't get it. There is so much more to any photo than the technical side. --Thehero 10:12, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ravn 10:30, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 13:33, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Agrees with Infrogmation. / Mats Halldin 08:20, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. --MarkSweep 16:41, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support ack to Thehero --Roger Zenner -!- 15:22, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Greudin

Image:Christiansborg Slot12.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Christiansborg Castle, seat of the Danish Parliament, the Folketing. Found by : Thue.

Support. villy 08:01, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC) (nominator)
Support Apollomelos 08:38, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 19:45, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 16:13, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
weak support I'm not sure, but the colours appear a little bit unnatural -- Bernd Untiedt 23:40, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak oppose - I don't like the composition, colors could be wrong. --Thomas G. Graf 18:42, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support-The green color of rust copper roof is right.--Fanghong 01:01, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Ravn 10:33, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 13:33, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Poor colors, disturbing tree. / Mats Halldin 22:40, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - too much sky --Marsupilami04 14:48, 15 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - Not bad, but not special -- Fabien1309 19:22, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Jakarta slumlife54.JPG -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support --Emuzesto 12:32, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose (cutted head) --Thomas G. Graf 08:53, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Additional comment: Yes its very expressive, but I have numerous photos of that kind, and I don't think, this is better than many others (even if they were not under GFDL). --Thomas G. Graf 18:53, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oppose see Thomas' comment --Jcornelius 11:09, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - I like it ... even with the head cut Fabien1309 17:38, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support very good composition, very expressive. the cutted head is not important - we can see the face - that's enough -- Bernd Untiedt 23:49, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose I can not enjoy people's misery. --Fanghong 00:29, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support You are not supposed to enjoy it. Photography is more than just pretty pictures. --Just1pin 08:11, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Right, nice composition and expression. We can't get to many photos of that kind. -- / Mats Halldin 07:46, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ravn 17:13, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support so emotional --Roger Zenner -!- 15:28, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support a bit headlessly, but i like that backgrund Schaengel89 @me 22:23, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Maclemo 13:03, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
support The composition is done very well, it is expressive and also informative thanks to the high resolution - did you notice the mosquito at the ear on the right? regards, High on a tree 21:07, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support expresses the topic well (but, as others have pointed out, the cut head is a drawback) David.Monniaux 07:49, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Jakarta slumlife65.JPG, not featured[edit]

Info created by Thehero - uploaded by Thehero - nominated by Kuzain -- Kuzain (talk) 04:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support The detail in the picture is very good and it captures a great deal of the subject matter. The garbage dump is contrasted with the excited faces of the children (and even the adult behind him) over a toy that many people in my country would not even pick up with their bare hands. All of this is excellently played upon the child's shirt: a shirt labeled California Beach and "Hope Club." -- Kuzain (talk) 04:28, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition is very muddled, with the cut-off adults behind the boy being very distracting. The hand and arm behind his ear don't help either I am afraid. --MichaelMaggs (talk) 07:32, 29 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Relevance. This image doesn't mean the same thing to me as it does to the nominator. Of course I understand the location and the probable life of those childrens. But it seems to me the kid is picking up the doll only to impress the photographer, and that he finds it discusting as well: he holds it by the hand not the body, other childrens and the adult are smiling/laughing as if it was not a normal behaviour, and the main kid's smile is not the one of a kid happy to find a toy, but the smile of a kid waiting for the reaction of the photographer (or someone nearby). --S23678 (talk) 13:37, 2 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. (Rule of the 5th day) Simonizer (talk) 14:51, 4 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:MandarinDucks.jpg -> featured[edit]

Madarine ducks, the symbol of true love

Nominate and support--Fanghong 00:29, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
support--Heidas 17:46, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - it's not bad, but there are many animal photos in Wikimedia Commons, which are better. --Thomas G. Graf 18:57, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 19:41, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Good photo showing different colors of male and female ducks. -- Infrogmation 20:32, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 13:33, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose (ack Thomas) -- Ravn 13:02, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support see Infrogmation -guety 01:12, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support David.Monniaux 16:03, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Mtbromo.jpg -> featured[edit]

The Tengger massif at sunrise, showing the volcanoes Mt.Bromo (large crater, smoking) and Mt.Semeru (background, smoking). The early morning fog surrounds the peaks, covering a plain of finest volcanic ashes.

Self-nomination, no vote. -- Ravn 10:48, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
~~Weak support, Thomas G. Graf 15:06, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)~~

"Normal" Support for the second version --Thomas G. Graf 20:06, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)

support - though there are visible color-distortions in the high-res version, but the panorama is impressive --Tsui 16:52, 10 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Greudin
Support Really impressive. If it would be my own photo I would like to cut a little bit from the sky which is the half of the image but the less interesting part. So cutting the sky at about 1/3 would make the image more panorama like and would increase the impression of the nice clouds and the interesting hills - I wished I would be at this place at this time ... Andreas Tille 06:50, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks. I am very open for help with clipping (or fixing the color-distortions...). Would it be allowed to alter the photo (like this) during the votes? Maybe you can vote "support fix" if you agree. -- Ravn 10:17, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I think it would be no problem in this special case when there are only "supports". Another option would be to keep it as it is for the moment and just do the change later - it is a great image in any way. Andreas Tille 14:09, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Thanks again. I uploaded the new version. It seems that everyone agrees with that. -- Ravn 11:38, 17 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Support Agree with Andreas Tille. -- Bernd Untiedt 18:25, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support but the legend should precise it's in Indonesia... It's only mentioned in the comment of first upload. Pabix 21:31, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support David.Monniaux 07:55, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Fabien1309 22:38, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:ForbysIbizaTown 02.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support--Fanghong 00:43, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neutral: The motiv is really nice, but please try to upload a version without JPEG artifacts in the sky and the horizont. (Perhaps cutting the sky on the top might enhance the image a little bit.) Andreas Tille 06:53, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 18:39, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Ravn 10:41, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Human shields greeted crossing border into Iraq.jpg -> featured[edit]

Excellent historic record though not long ago.

Nominate and support--Fanghong 01:10, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Thehero 10:20, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Ravn 13:01, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support, Thomas G. Graf 20:03, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support A real wartime photograph. Rama 13:47, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:BlueWhaleWithCalf.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Blue Whale with Calf, Ólafsvík, Iceland

Nominate Andreas Tille 06:58, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - probably a great experience seeing those two, but the photo is not at all impressive--Lc95 11:01, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

besides the great experience - it is just what Blue Whales normally do: It is quite seldom that they show their imporessive fluke like for instance as Humpback Whales. Thus the image is not kind of beautiful but realistic - yes the ocean was this blue. The shot is very close up, you can see the calf breathing - the only problem is that there is no sign of size comparison. Andreas Tille 14:54, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Support. James F. (talk) 13:33, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose I think this photo is documenting the experience of spotting whales very well, so it might do fine in, say, an article on eco-tourism. A photo documenting whales should show the shape, size, behavior, etc of the animal, and this photo fails to do so. Besides the subject partly falls outside of the frame, so it's not technically brilliant either. I like the photo, but it's not of featured quality. Sorry / Mats Halldin 08:49, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Ravn 09:14, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 17:09, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 18:40, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Colorado-provencal-ocres.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Ochre mines, Roussillon village.

Nominate and support. Greudin 14:46, 11 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose (technical quality) --Thomas G. Graf 11:15, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Ravn 10:41, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:Booby chick.jpg -> featured[edit]

Booby chick photographed in the Palmyra Atoll, from a USCG website (the image needs to be renamed to (Booby (chick)).

Nominate. Duk 06:46, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 16:30, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Thomas G. Graf 20:07, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
weak Oppose Very nice. The problem: The leaves in the foreground are sharp but the head is not sharp. -- Bernd Untiedt 10:13, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Ravn 13:03, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support The head is sharp imo. / Mats Halldin 08:29, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Lc95 09:25, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Fabien1309 22:35, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Aoineko 15:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support very nice --Jcornelius 19:22, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Israeli West Bank Barrier.jpg -> featured[edit]

Israel's Wall, Hebron Occupied Palestine. Taken by just1pin Augest 2004.

Nominate and support. --Thehero 08:07, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ravn 13:04, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support--Fanghong 09:18, 16 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support--guety 01:15, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 20:59, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak Support --Thomas G. Graf 11:14, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support the composition etc. are not good, but the topic is important David.Monniaux 07:43, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support actually the composition is what I like most about this pic. It helps give a sense of scale, although you really need an object like a person to get a real sense. If anything I think the colour and light levels need enhancing. —Christiaan 10:26, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Aoineko 15:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Jordens_inre.jpg -> featured[edit]

This illustration is also uploaded as Image:Jordens_inre_med_siffror.jpg.

Created, nominated and supported by Mats Halldin 19:26, 12 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Nice CAD-job mon. //Solkoll 18:25, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Greudin
Support, ~~but what are those two black stripes in asia? (right top of the illustration)~~ norro 10:25, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oops, I've fixed those now. / Mats Halldin
Oppose not special CAD-job David.Monniaux 07:42, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It illustrates exactly what it should and that is not always easy, (overkill is a common fault). But ok! make a better one and I change my vote to favour yours =) // Solkoll 16:56, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Image:AlohaTowerAtNight.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support - A landmark on the coast of O'ahu, Hawai'i. Found on Wikipedia. Baricom 06:28, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Colors are very good, but perspective and composition is wrong and contrast could improve to (one can't even read what time it is). -- / Mats Halldin 07:33, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose unfavourable perspective -- Bernd Untiedt 10:15, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose (perspective, composition) --Thomas G. Graf 20:09, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose same reasons David.Monniaux 07:41, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - The building is rather pretty, the picture is not. -- Fabien1309 22:34, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose I would never vote for a leaning building - Arpingstone 09:55, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Antinous Mandragone profil.jpg

Image:Eiffel Tower.JPG -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and supportSchaengel89 @me 08:26, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose nice colours, nice contrast in the thumbnail. But the large version shows some bad camera shake and/or is not in focus. Besides I don't like the section choice.--Lc95 09:14, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- 195.37.78.86 10:43, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC) first contribution, no comment: ~~shut up!~~Pardon-me, Mr. 195.37.78.86/not enfranchised Schaengel89 @me 10:30, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC) -- I would not consider that an appropriote way of dealing with other users. I think you should be more polite. --Lc95 12:46, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)

So do I. -- Ravn 14:28, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC) (who may use the IP 195.37.78.86 if he forgets to log in)

Oppose - Bad perspective and composition --Thomas G. Graf 16:01, 18 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 10:27, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose cannot see the first floor which is however 60 meters high... Pabix no wonder, he didnt photographed the 1st floor ;-) 84.175.240.6 22:19, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose agree with Thomas and Pabix --Bernd Untiedt 21:14, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. Out of focus! - Arpingstone 09:58, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - Don't like the cut "legs" -- Fabien1309 22:33, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - how could it be a Featured Pic if the larger version is way out of focus? - Arpingstone 09:58, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Chicago top down view.png -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support - self-nomination. I made it because I could find no map, commercial or otherwise, that accurately shows this street layout. --SPUI 02:24, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. --MarkSweep 06:46, 19 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - how about using a white background? -- Ravn 17:15, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
I have edited the picture slightly --SPUI 01:49, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support // Solkoll 16:42, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) The new background colour is better.
Support - an outstanding diagram. Well done! - Arpingstone 10:00, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support good picture Pabix ܀ 20:56, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Ume blossom 2005.03.14.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support Self nomination. Prunus mume (Japanese Plum) blossom.
Weak oppose - The background is very nervous and makes it difficult to concentrate on the blossom itself. If the photo is about a single blossom, it should IMHO have less depth of focus (or a different background) - if it is about the bloom of ume trees, I'd like to see more of the tree, or more trees. -- Ravn 17:26, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose agree with Ravn. -- Bernd Untiedt 21:23, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose (background issue) --Thomas G. Graf 12:09, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support I like this background as giving the impression of an infinite multiplicity of the same blossom. David.Monniaux 17:04, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support The whole spirit of Japanese Plum blossoming is captured here (this sentence might make little sense unless you've been there :p). Rama 13:40, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - Sorry, the background is chaos and makes the pic unpleasant to look at - Arpingstone 10:02, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Autumn Red peaches.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support WεFt 19:45, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. ~~It's a bit small, I will upload a larger version.~~ Update: the small version that's currently here has been carefully edited from the larger version that's also available from USDA-ARS. I was unable to quickly reproduce the editing steps to achieve the same kind of sharpness and saturation (it's a lot trickier than sharpening and bumping up the saturation globally, all of these things were apparently done selectively to produce the small version). --MarkSweep 23:39, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Est-ce la bistroïsation de cette image qui lui vaut la nomination ici ? Dans ce cas je ne regrette pas de l'y avoir placée. (English speakers : I put this image Yesterday in our Village_Pump page on fr-Wikipedia ; I wondered if its nomination stems from that). Pabix 18:51, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - c'est quoi, la bistroīsation? Ça aide à faire des meilleurs photos? ;) -- Ravn 17:32, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Non, du tout. Juste que j'avais mise cette image dans l'accueil du Bistro de Wikipédia, elle a été sans doute remarquée de cette manière. C'est bizarre, car je croyais déjà qu'elle était de qualité ! Pabix 19:50, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Support —FoeNyx 20:54, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 18:08, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - I can smell it .... -- Fabien1309 22:31, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Aoineko 15:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Snow crystallization in Akureyri 2005-02-26 19-03-37.jpeg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support: self-nomination, a crystallized branch in Iceland. —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 20:20, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neutral. Yes, that's indeed kinda special, but i don't really like the lights in the background and the way, the branches are cut. Besides that ... very nice picture. --norro 23:05, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- I was just about to say the exact same thing. --MarkSweep 23:10, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  - I just wanted to nominate one from this series, perhaps another one would be more fitting, any suggestions? —Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason 23:57, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
    - I personally like this one and this one best. --MarkSweep 02:07, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
  - I do like the first one Mark suggested: this one. Maybe bring up the contrast or something so that a smaller version still shows the subject clearly. _- Phyzome is Tim McCormack 02:15, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose poor technical quality -- Bernd Untiedt 21:15, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose (composition, technical quality) --Thomas G. Graf 12:10, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - sorry, just not striking or special to me - Arpingstone 10:04, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bombus Bumblebee (Bestoevning).jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support WεFt 21:41, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Uuh, yeah ... i like this! --norro 23:02, 21 Mar 2005 (UTC)
support very nice. --Lc95 13:19, 22 Mar 2005 (UTC)
weak support because it's a bit blurred on the right... not only a bit! Pabix
Weak support, ack Pabix. -- Ravn 17:34, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
oppose nice, but poor technical quality. the bee is not sharp -- Bernd Untiedt 21:17, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 20:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose too much background and too small bee -- Aka 07:06, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose ack aka --Thomas G. Graf 12:10, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 18:09, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak Support - Some blur on the right, but still cute -- Fabien1309 22:30, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —MRB 10:11, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Linaria.alpina.web.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support WεFt 18:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 20:55, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC) see BerndH's comment. FoeNyx 16:22, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Fanghong 01:47, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose not sharp enough, compression artifacts -- Aka 06:56, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose this picture is the same as Image:Linaria alpina 310802.jpg, which was from me. Making it brighter didn´t help at all, more like the opposite, also it is smaller than the other one. I tokk this picture more than two years ago in a hurry, so it is not what it could be. --BerndH 07:10, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 12:11, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - seems to have very little contrast - Arpingstone 10:07, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Sari fabric.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support WεFt 18:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 19:31, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
strong support. Excellent picture. Pabix 19:56, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Bernd Untiedt 21:18, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support Nataraja 21:49, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 20:56, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Opposethis pic already was the featured pic of March 23 why nominate it again? --Fanghong 01:42, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

It was not the featured pic. It was the picture of the day. For the moment, the picture of the day is not necessarily a featured pic.
Pabix ܀ 07:53, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Support. villy 18:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - Beautiful picture -- Fabien1309 22:41, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support LoopZilla 08:52, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Aoineko 15:53, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support. --Heidas 16:22, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support - most excellent - Arpingstone 10:08, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Anden2.JPG not featured[edit]

halfways a selfnomination, thus no vote Denisoliver 23:19, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 23:49, 24 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support but: please givt this pic the name of that mountain Schaengel89 @me 09:33, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- sorry, would love to do this, but i haven't got the slightest idea of its name. Denisoliver 14:49, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose blurred / suboptimal light (I think it's made through the airplane-window) -- Bernd Untiedt 19:31, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose. No point in this pic - no mountain name, no contrast and tilted - Arpingstone 10:10, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Ravn 11:45, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Russian-Matroshka.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Russian series wooden doll. Smallers are inside the larger one very special.

Nominate and support --Fanghong 02:07, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- you support your own photo ..
Oppose too much background, boring positioning, flash reflections at the dolls, distracting shadows due to the flash -- Aka 07:04, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Opppose --norro 10:00, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Opppose --Atamari 17:28, 25 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, ack aka --Thomas G. Graf 12:12, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Jcornelius 19:18, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - not special enough to be an FP - Arpingstone 10:12, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Eggs Florentine.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Self nominated LoopZilla 23:20, 26 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose bad composition (close up, if you want to show the eggs), nothing special, not sharp --Thomas G. Graf 11:09, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 13:31, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose (bad composition) David.Monniaux 07:40, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support this is just the sort of basic information clearly produced that wiki commons needs - its not all about good (taste, composition) or whathaveyou 62.125.76.3 20:12, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Fabien1309 22:42, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Ravn 09:17, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose nothing special --Jcornelius 19:23, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - why put up a blurred pic? - Arpingstone 10:13, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Loiret river DSC02532.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support (shameless self nomination) David.Monniaux 14:57, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support AtelierJoly 22:05, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
support -212.30.222.56 04:40, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support—FoeNyx 13:33, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
oppose I don't like the composition: the tree on the right side / the box with the flowers is too small -- Bernd Untiedt 21:06, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 22:47, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 16:29, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
support. But I don't understand why there are two licenses. Do you live on the Loiret river or are you closer to the Rue d'Ulm ? Pabix ܀ 20:58, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Dual licensing: users may use either license, at their own choice. Helps in solving compatibility problems. David.Monniaux 06:30, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oppose ack bernd -- Ravn 09:19, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Jcornelius 19:24, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - nice pic but not quite special enough for Featured - Arpingstone

Image:Japan Tottori MitokuSan Nageiredo DSC01248.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support (shameless self-nomination) David.Monniaux 15:47, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --norro 21:56, 27 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support LoopZilla 10:51, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support—FoeNyx 13:33, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support (and when I say "support"... well, whatever...) Rama 13:44, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. villy 18:13, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
weak Support Interesting object. But it seems to be a little bit blurred. -- Bernd Untiedt 21:10, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 13:45, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Jcornelius 19:24, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Japan Fushimi Inari jinja gates DSC00442.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support (another shameless self-nomination) David.Monniaux 15:58, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Lack of sense of scale LoopZilla 16:06, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose // Solkoll 16:37, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC) Not strait taken, the light is not good.
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 17:03, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Ravn 09:21, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Get_It • 21:11, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Fabien1309 19:58, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Grilled_vegetables.jpg[edit]

Nominate Salim Fadhley 20:26, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
oppose the object is boring / poor technical quality -- Bernd Untiedt 21:13, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
oppose nice grilled vegetables would be nice, but these ones are burnt! :-) David.Monniaux 21:45, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support LoopZilla 22:15, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose agree with David.Monniaux ;-) —MRB 12:21, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 16:29, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose ack david.monniaux ;P -- Ravn 09:22, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose ack David Monniaux -- Fabien1309 20:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Grilled_vegetables.jpg

Image:Paris City Hall DSC00050.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support (shameless self-nomination, as usual) David.Monniaux 19:46, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
oppose weak colours and bad composition -- Bernd Untiedt 21:01, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose ack Bernd —MRB 15:06, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, --Thomas G. Graf 16:37, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Ravn 09:22, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - it's OK but a little boring, needs a more imaginative angle or foreground - Arpingstone 10:17, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - Fabien1309 20:01, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Frühling blühender Kirschenbaum.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support - Fabien1309 22:25, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --norro 22:50, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support (though the high resolution is not very sharp) —FoeNyx 07:20, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 13:45, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak Support --Thomas G. Graf 16:33, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ravn 09:23, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Aoineko 15:53, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Get_It • 21:12, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support // Solkoll 21:46, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Haloumi_mint_pesto.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support LoopZilla 22:29, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose I can't identify anything --norro 22:49, 28 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Retract - What was I thinking, this picture is rubbish! I agree with Norro. It is kind of bland, I think the veggies picture above is slightly better. --Salimfadhley 17:52, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Fabien1309 19:08, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Tagpfauenauge.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support (self-nomination) BenHur 01:04, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support David.Monniaux 06:08, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --norro 10:02, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 13:45, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —MRB 15:02, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - beautiful --Thomas G. Graf 16:35, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
strong support - excellent work Pabix ܀ 20:53, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ravn 09:23, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Bernd Untiedt 19:27, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Fabien1309 19:27, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Aoineko 15:53, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support - wow! - Arpingstone 10:19, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support --Heidas 11:45, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Pintaric 18:48, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Get_It • 21:12, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Pixeltoo 23:08, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Three hoodoos in Bryce Canyon.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support David.Monniaux 08:38, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support LoopZilla 08:42, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
support Pabix ܀ 20:59, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support WεFt 12:04, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 12:24, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Bernd Untiedt 19:15, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 18:15, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - focus is a little off and it's just not very interesting, needs a better angle (to all the writers above me: I'm sure the photographer would appreciate being told your reasons) - Arpingstone 10:22, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - (can't make out what is disturbing me.. it just does not look featuresque) -- Ravn 11:47, 6 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Pain epices DSC00141.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support (another self-nomination) David.Monniaux 09:57, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 11:07, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support LoopZilla 13:18, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose nothing special —MRB 15:13, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 16:35, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neutral. -- Comment in French (sorry). Bien que le sujet mérite d'être représenté dans les images de qualité, de par son goût excellent, je trouve les couleurs un peu tristounettes, même si tu les as déjà réhaussées. Je te suggère de refaire un pain d'épices (si c'est de toi), avec beaucoup de gingembre et beaucoup de miel, de le photographier au soleil, dehors par exemple, et de m'inviter à prendre le thé avec toi. La dernière proposition étant facultative ! Pabix ܀ 21:04, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)

C'est en effet un pain d'épices de moi, mais il était pris en lumière d'hiver...

David.Monniaux 09:28, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Translation into English: (rough) Even though the subject deserves to be represented in the featured pictures seection due to its excellent taste, I find the colors a bit gloomy, even if you've already lightened them. I suggest that you cook another pain d'épices (if you made the first one), with lots of ginger and honey and then photograph it in sunlight, outside for example, and finally that you invite me to tea with you, the last suggestion being optional! Pabix

Yes it is my pain d'épices, but the picture was taken in a wintery light... David.Monniaux (Translation done by --Zantastik 23:22, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC))

Oppose -- Aka 05:59, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose ack Pabix -- Ravn 09:24, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose the dish ist cutted (left-below corner Schaengel89 @me 11:03, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - sorry, just not interesting - Arpingstone 10:24, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Curry_Beanz.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Self Nominate AtelierJoly 13:14, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose nothing special, don't like the color of the background —MRB 15:16, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose, Thomas G. Graf 16:36, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Aka 05:59, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose nothing special, and the colors don't look good David.Monniaux 06:33, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Ravn 09:24, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - why is this here!!! It could never be a Featured pic! - Arpingstone 10:26, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- Fabien1309 20:03, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Paris Notre Dame DSC00732.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Self-nominate (I'm on a spree through my archives) David.Monniaux 21:57, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 22:57, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support but I think there are many photos of Paris which are presented here. It's not bad, but it's not a good balance. Pabix ܀ 05:38, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

I myself do not think that the "featured pictures" need to achieve some kind of externally imposed "balance"; that is, I think that each picture should be judged by itself (composition, technical quality, topicality...) and in relation only to other pictures of the same topic. It is of course somewhat unfortunate that we have more pictures of famous Western metropoles and touristic spots than of less travelled places. David.Monniaux 06:41, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Oppose a bit blurry, IMHO not special enough for one of the most photographed subjects of the world. -- Ravn 09:28, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose unfavourable perspective / weak colours / bad composition (too much water) -- Bernd Untiedt 19:17, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 22:49, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 18:16, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support--Fito hg 01:02, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - cathedral is too distant and is leaning, and it's slightly out of focus - Arpingstone 10:28, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - for the same reasons given above, especially the weak colours and the much water - zooming in would help here probably Andreas Tille 12:15, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Primula aka.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support (sharp and colorful) —FoeNyx 22:16, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support very sharp and colorful indeed David.Monniaux 06:35, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ravn 09:26, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --Thomas G. Graf 16:48, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support I hope the colours are natural -- Bernd Untiedt 19:27, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
- When do you visit Zwickau/Germany the next time? :) -- Aka 21:28, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support. Aoineko 15:52, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support - wow, this is exceptional. Well done! - Arpingstone
Support -- Fabien1309 22:40, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support - Regardless of whether the colors are natural or not, this picture is awesome. -- JennaMarie83 02:10, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support // Solkoll 13:32, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC) oooooh!

Image:Indonesia_bike27.JPG -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support --Just1pin 23:13, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support AtelierJoly 07:34, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support expressive -- Bernd Untiedt 19:19, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --norro 20:48, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support - good pic - Arpingstone 10:33, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Heidas 11:46, 9 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 14:35, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 14:45, 6 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Indonesia bike28.JPG -> not featured[edit]

nominate and support --Just1pin 23:21, 29 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose AtelierJoly 07:35, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 16:48, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose suboptimal -- Bernd Untiedt 19:19, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose too much shadows, closed eyes, sad looking kids -- Aka 14:13, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - too shadowed - Arpingstone 10:32, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:African_penguins.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support LoopZilla 12:33, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 13:03, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak support We could use 1) more resolution 2) a cropped version around the penguins (but 2) is not possible without 1) ) David.Monniaux 14:37, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --norro 15:32, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
oppose bad composition: too much beach and water / the penguins are too small / we can't see the feet -- Bernd Untiedt 19:21, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - I like it like that -- Fabien1309 20:26, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support I like it. And the Commons are not Wikipedia. Even if the image is named "penguins", it can be useful in other contexts. -- Aka 14:05, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - I like the composition --Thomas G. Graf 17:40, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support WεFt 19:50, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support —MRB 10:45, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - if the image is titled "Penguins" I want to see penguins and not a lot of beach an sky. I even do not like the color and structure of the foreground. Andreas Tille 12:21, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - to less penguins, and even the smalls penguins don't show their feet. MatthiasKabel 20:37, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - too little of the penguins - Arpingstone 20:52, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Spargel_sauce_hollandaise.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Nominate and support LoopZilla 13:59, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Weak support I'd like the colors to be brighter. David.Monniaux 14:17, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - bad lighting, very dark shadow in the bottom right. -- Ravn 15:18, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 16:46, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose ack Ravn -- Bernd Untiedt 19:23, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose but in my opinion the bad composition is more distracting than the colors -- Aka 13:58, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose ack Aka -- Fabien1309 16:56, 5 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Jimbo-wales---fosdem-2005.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Jimmy Donal Wales at Fosdem 2005, Brussels

Nominate and support : « Jimmy Donal Wales at Fosdem 2005, Brussels » by Chrys —FoeNyx 17:58, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support --norro 19:56, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - Is this an image of a gray wall or of Jimbo? Thuresson 20:20, 30 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support LoopZilla 08:12, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support it's an image of de:Jimmy Donal Wales in front of a grey wall Schaengel89 @me 10:30, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Neutral, support only with less wall in the picture. -- Ravn 10:44, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose agree with Thuresson -- Bernd Untiedt 11:40, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support I like the composition and the colors - I just like it as it is. Yes, it is no classical portrait photo, but most likely this was not the goal either. -- Aka 13:51, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support - agree with aka --Thomas G. Graf 17:36, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Oppose It's a pretty unattractive picture. 18.33.0.62 14:37, 10 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose -- I find it quite unattractive too ... -- Fabien1309 19:10, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support - agree with aka --tsca 18:06, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Post voting comment I like the message which is that of a pensive Jimbo on the right, juxtaposed with a blank wall on the left for us all to write on... LoopZilla 12:59, 15 Apr 2005 (UTC)

 7 support, 4 oppose >>  not featured

Image:Amaryllis stamens aka.jpg -> featured[edit]

Nominate and support -- Fabien1309 19:36, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support I'd have like the petals not to be blurry, but I understand it would need enormous depth of field (yet, this is a still, so...) David.Monniaux 22:03, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support -- Ravn 09:21, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support —FoeNyx 10:56, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support --norro 21:04, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support WεFt 12:07, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support --Thomas G. Graf 18:17, 2 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - I'd want to see a bit more depth of field to support this one - Arpingstone 10:35, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
- I already used f/32 - the smallest aperture most lenses can do. Here is a picture of the whole flower. -- Aka 18:50, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support - Lovely composition. --Salimfadhley 09:16, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support. I don't think there is an easy way to improve the depth of field. --MarkSweep 01:10, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support. James F. (talk) 11:03, 8 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Image:Varenna Clouds.jpg -> not featured[edit]

Self-nomination, no vote —MRB 20:16, 31 Mar 2005 (UTC)
Support LoopZilla 08:18, 1 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Support--Fito hg 01:01, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose Richardfabi 12:10, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 13:45, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - not interesting to me, and the clouds are out of focus - Arpingstone 10:37, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - Cloud photos are boring. --Salimfadhley 09:17, 7 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Oppose - ack Arpingstone, Salimfadhley -- Ravn