Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2024

File:Rainbow bee-eater (Merops ornatus) Fogg Dam.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2024 at 19:14:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Meropidae (Bee-eaters)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 22:50, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:06, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 00:45, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rjcastillo (talk) 02:43, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:32, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support of course Cmao20 (talk) 20:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 11:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Meropidae (Bee-eaters)

File:Wood Sandpiper Safari Park.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Feb 2024 at 16:53:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus_:_Tringa
Info created by Abdul Momin - uploaded by Abdul Momin - nominated by Moheen -- ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 16:53, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 16:53, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support perfect composition. -- -donald- (talk) 08:20, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Ouch, very bad photo editing especially on reflextion, mising parts. Oversharpened subject, fur low quality. --Mile (talk) 09:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Mile. --Wilfredor (talk) 13:51, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This image should indicate that it has been retouched or otherwise altered --Kritzolina (talk) 08:02, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment There's probably not enough definition on the feathers for a feature, but how were you able to spot retouching? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I hadn't noticed the suspect retouching Moheen. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very good in thumbnail but regretfully not FP at full size for the reasons Mile and Charles mention Cmao20 (talk) 18:01, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:58, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cape Barren geese (Cereopsis novaehollandiae) in flight Kangaroo Island 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Feb 2024 at 17:56:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Cereopsis
Info Flying over trees burnt during the 2020/21 bushfires. Get info on the wildlife deaths on page on pages 36/7 of latest Sharp Eye on Wildlife Photography. No FPs of this genus/species. All by Charlesjsharp ] -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very noticeable blurry trees. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Background will always be blurred when panning the camera. That is intentional. As is F16 to get all the birds in focus. @SHB2000: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, but that just means that it can't be one of this site's finest pictures. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see at least three dust spots, above the leftmost bird and two above the rightmost bird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose Per SHB2000. Charles, the sharpening mask is wonky, our AI overlords seem to have mistaken some tree branches for birds --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:34, 21 February 2024 (UTC) [reply]

Comment Čarlton, beside dust spots, which could be cleaned, i dont get trees. They are far further than birds i suppose and yet there are some parts of tree in hyperfocal and much of them out... !? So actually you keep birds, go there exact time on put same EXIF and make trees. Than stitch. Try manual foucs to set trees to similar blur as here. --Mile (talk) 09:56, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies. Wrong version (magazine edit to highlight trees) was nominated. Have reverted to original version. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This could go, i would still do some botton crop, some alien pixels. Anoted.--Mile (talk) 18:25, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I had a good look, but I cannot see any 'alien pixels'. Would crop if that is the majority view. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:15, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yup, much better. --Julesvernex2 (talk)
Support I can't see any errors now. Great capture. Cmao20 (talk) 19:27, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:20, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much better version, thanks. I don't have a problem with the degree of blur on the trees. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:26, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 21:16, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support –-Llez (talk) 12:52, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great capture of a difficult subject -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:40, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 15:07, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:17, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 20:12, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:42, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:SAARC Fountain 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Feb 2024 at 17:17:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Light trails
Info created by Azim Khan Ronnie - uploaded by Azim Khan Ronnie - nominated by Moheen -- ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 17:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 17:17, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I really like those light trails --Kritzolina (talk) 17:50, 20 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support this is real creative. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:26, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 15:46, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality does not convince me. --Mile (talk) 18:31, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a long exposure photograph, so the noise… ★ 18:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

★ And there is solution, ND filter. f/14 on APS-C is overdose, increasing "mistakes" like halos etc, check upper-left corner, where "benefits" came. Could pass just noise. --Mile (talk) 10:07, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Mile, strong processing artefacts. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:23, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The effect of this is great at small size but it just looks too weird and overprocessed at full size Cmao20 (talk) 18:23, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, especially Cmao20. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:01, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 22:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ciudadela, Carcasona, Francia, 2023-01-07, DD 216-218 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2024 at 21:03:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#France
Info Fortified city of Carcassonne during the blue hour, France. Founded during the Gallo-Roman period, the citadel derives its reputation from its 3 kilometres (1.9 mi) long double surrounding walls interspersed by 52 towers. The medieval citadel, situated on a hill on the right bank of the river Aude, was restored at the end of the 19th century by the theorist and architect Eugène Viollet-le-Duc. In 1997, it was added to the UNESCO list of World Heritage Sites because of its exceptional testimony to the architecture and planning of a medieval fortress town. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:03, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Superb Cmao20 (talk) 21:46, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:50, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:23, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 22:29, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rjcastillo (talk) 02:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful at full size, really impressive sharpness and overall quality. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:58, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:21, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Composition, light, blue hour -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:47, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 09:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:2021 December Tornado - Cayce, KY (51750743572).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 02:47:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Storms
Info created by State Farm - uploaded by A1Cafel - nominated by WeatherWriter -- WeatherWriter (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- High-quality (5,143 × 2,999 pixels) damage photo of a house destroyed by the 2021 Western Kentucky tornado in Cayce, Kentucky. Note, this image is higher quality than the current highest quality tornado-related FP (4,032 × 3,024 pixels — File:Low-end EF3 damage to a home in Virginia Beach, Virginia.jpg) WeatherWriter (talk) 02:47, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This PoV is probably not the best way to show the aftermath. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose extremely poor crop. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:27, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note, this is not a “crop” and was published as is by State Farm. WeatherWriter (talk) 18:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The way the image was framed is a crop. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:24, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per others, and we understand that this crop was done when the photo was shot. What do you think would be a clearer way to express our meaning? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:27, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination WeatherWriter (talk) 16:33, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ovos de Páscoa da Garoto.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2024 at 20:13:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Sweet food or Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Texture photography
Info Garoto's Easter eggs hanged ( Question or hooked?) at a supermarket in Colatina, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 20:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 20:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment "Hanged" refers only to a form of execution; the common past tense of hang is "hung." Anyway, I like this photo, and I'm considering whether the right crop bugs me too much to support or not, but I certainly wouldn't be disturbed if it were featured. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: hung or hooked? ★ 23:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hung, I guess. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Excellent quality at the center but not on the sides, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:07, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the photo is very dark TOUMOU (talk) 10:11, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@TOUMOU: these Easter egg packaging is predominantly dark green/red ★ 10:26, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wilfredor just improved the sharpening; @Ikan Kekek, Basile Morin, and TOUMOU: please, take another look now. ★ 16:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

While it's a static photograph, the texts "Talento 350gr" at the bottom and at the right are more blurry than those in the center -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:44, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Arion maybe should call to AppleCare Replacement Service. It look like a very common situation in several Iphone 15. [1][2][3] Wilfredor (talk) 04:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The third link is not related to the phone camera.

Anyway, I I withdraw my nomination. Thanks for the report. ★ 16:00, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:St. Trudpert Münstertal 04.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2024 at 17:34:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info I found this picture really satisfying both in terms of the composition - symmetrical, but with just enough asymmetry to make it interesting - and the beautiful rich colours. Created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:34, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Nice, but the left and right crops feel close (I understand the problem Llez faced, but I'd still theoretically like some space on either side, and maybe on top, too), and the 2nd floor's sharpness might be OK but is hardly overwhelming. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMO, there is enough space on either side. Otherwise excellent quality. --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:12, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think Ikan means that the blue windows are right at the edge of the frame, which is fair enough, but ultimately you have got to make the crop somewhere. Personally I think it is well framed as it is but we will see how the votes go. Cmao20 (talk) 21:45, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Correct. That's how I react to this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:34, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Info You can see a JPG-copy of the original raw file here. The photo was taken with 10mm wide angle. It was not possible to go further back to get the lines more vertical. After perspective orrection there were not many alternatives in cropping in my opinion. I request anyone who has a better suggestion for cropping to upload it using the link mentioned. --Llez (talk) 07:16, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It may not have been possible to shoot what I would have considered an FP of this facade, then. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:49, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 22:32, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination --Llez (talk) 07:05, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan Kekek. -- Karelj (talk) 14:02, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Also per Ikan, I miss something here that makes the shot special. It is nice and interesting but there is a gap to extraordinary. Poco a poco (talk) 22:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pleasant view but not breathtaking, sorry, awkward crop because the window shutters are cut out -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:46, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination This picture is unlikely to get three more supports. It's a shame because to me it was a really obvious candidate and I honestly expected it to become FP in a landslide five-day pass. Cmao20 (talk) 00:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 00:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Silver-breasted Broadbill 0A2A9641.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2024 at 19:50:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Eurylaimidae_(Broadbills)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:50, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another masterpiece from JJ Cmao20 (talk) 20:22, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JJ, you've done it again! --SHB2000 (talk) 20:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Masterpiece it is not. That implies technical excellence. It is an outstanding capture of a very hard-to-find species. That is why it is clearly FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:16, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Is it a rare bird, although it's considered "least concern"? Dunno, but it's very good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many little-known birds are IUCN Least Concern. IUCN uses data on declining/increasing numbers to move an animal up or down a category. With no data, they cannot act. This occurs in many localities so is unlikely to be threatened with extinction. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:39, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 18:07, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 07:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:22, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 09:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support High level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:48, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 21:17, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 01:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Maddona del Melograno (Collegiata di Santa Maria della Scala - Chieri).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2024 at 08:47:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures
Info created by Brigante_mandrogno - uploaded by Brigante_mandrogno - nominated by Brigante mandrogno -- Brigante mandrogno (talk) 08:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Brigante mandrogno (talk) 08:47, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lighting and technical quality ~~Vignetting~~. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:17, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Hi Brigante mandrogno and welcome to FPC. This is a really interesting motif and I enjoyed seeing this photograph but sadly it is some way short of the technical quality needed for FP. The detail at full size just isn't there as a consequence of the use of an iPhone camera which generally struggles in low light - please have a look at some of the other FPs in the Sculptures gallery and make sure to view them at full resolution to see the kind of image quality that makes an FP. This photo would also be better if the window was centered in the frame, as is it's clearly closer to the left than the right, and that might be enough to preclude it from FP by itself. Please keep trying though - few people get an FP on their first try - and also have a look at the featured picture guidelines, the quality image guidelines, and the previous succcessful candidates in the FP galleries, to find out what the technical requirements are for a featured picture. Cmao20 (talk) 20:19, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20 thank you very much for your kind and thorough response. I sincerely appreciate the time you took to provide me with such valuable feedback. I assure you that I will do my utmost to improve the quality of my photographs and to meet the standards required for a Featured Picture. I am grateful for the opportunity to learn and grow within this community. Thank you again for the support and constructive advice. By the way, I did not use any vignetting filter or any others. Additionally, I intentionally did not center the window in the frame for compositional reasons. I don't particularly like 'perfectly-centered things'. That's all :) Brigante mandrogno (talk) 01:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 01:33, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mt Technical from Lewis tops, Lewis Pass Scenic Reserve, New Zealand 06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 01:05:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/New Zealand#Canterbury (Waitaha)
Info I think the shadows cast by shifting clouds on this New Zealand mountain add some real depth and dynamism to this photo, and I also love the colours and the touch of mist at the top of the mountain. created by Podzemnik - uploaded by Podzemnik - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive landscape.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:27, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice and high-quality. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:34, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:38, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 13:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 09:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was here two months ago and this is quite the way to represent Lewis Pass. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:28, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Appealing scenery -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 11:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 12:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:57, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/New Zealand#Canterbury (Waitaha)

File:Sour rainbow belts.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 11:58:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Sweet_food
Info Sour rainbow belts, my photo. -- Mile (talk) 11:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 11:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 12:48, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Something really different, beautiful colors, excellent composition --Kritzolina (talk) 13:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looks like selective blurring of the white background around the coloured pieces. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:43, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Info Highligthed. --Mile (talk) 16:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral per Charles. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition and execution. The blurring around some of the pieces (from the focus stacking, it seems) is minimal, in my opinion --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:57, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Info I just explain again, and put notation there, region around one candy is highlighted. I put with purpose : food photo is normally on High-Key. At least this one should be (white dish, tablecloth), so colors of candy came out "loud". --Mile (talk) 09:32, 27 February 2024 (UTC) p.S. "Blur is edited".[reply]

Support Good quality and creative composition Cmao20 (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Makes you want sour candy. --SDudley (talk) 02:46, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Composition and high level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:52, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 11:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 17:08, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Sweet_food

File:Galanthus Nivalis, sneeuwklokje. 12-02-2024. (d.j.b.).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 05:21:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Amaryllidaceae
Info Galanthus nivalis double-flowered Snowdrop. Focus stack of 44 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm impressed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan Kekek. --Harlock81 (talk) 11:37, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 13:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 07:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:24, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sure, very satisfying photo Cmao20 (talk) 15:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 23:33, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:23, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Amaryllidaceae

File:038 Svartifoss waterfall (Iceland) Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Mar 2024 at 09:58:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Iceland#Southern Region (Suðurland)
Info created & uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:58, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Thank you for the nomination! --Giles Laurent (talk) 11:17, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not an exceptional long exposure nor of Svartifoss – especially the hazy bit at the top. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:44, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No, I think the PoV is too close and there's not enough sky. I am guessing the weather was poor for photography. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The light is very grey and dull, but maybe that's just Iceland. I'll support if the purple CA on the rocks at the bottom right is removed. Cmao20 (talk) 18:25, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, Iceland is known to have this weather. I just uploaded a new file that fixed the CA (press cmd+R on Mac or Ctrl+F5 on Windows with image open to force refresh) -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:56, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support lovely, thank you Cmao20 (talk) 23:07, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:32, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is a great motif. As a photo, I find that parts of it are great and much of it is at FP level. But I'm torn because I don't like the parts that are blurred not from the exposure but due to the depth of field, mainly the near right corner and some ways behind it, and I also don't love the sky. Basically, per SHB2000 and Charles, but no vote from me yet. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:58, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support For the composition. ★ 22:33, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per SHB2000. -- Ivar (talk) 20:11, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing sky, weather and light , sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:41, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Basile Poco a poco (talk) 19:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile and Charles, sorry. Sometimes the conditions just aren't on the photographer's side. BigDom (talk) 11:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Персеид (метеор).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Mar 2024 at 20:38:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy
Info created by FilipNeshkoski - uploaded by FilipNeshkoski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 20:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 21:15, 22 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 00:17, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good and very clean photo of a night sky with a meteor trail, a very good QI and possible VI, but not incredibly inspiring to me such that I'd support a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:58, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very small size. Content is not spectacular, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:35, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty and interesting but per Ikan, IMO not outstanding enough for FP Cmao20 (talk) 18:26, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Treuenbrietzen 50 Pfg 1921 Luther.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 18:36:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Money (banknotes)
Info Designed by Heinz Schiestl (1921), issued by the Town of Treuenbrietzen, reproduced from an original banknote, uploaded and nominated by -- Palauenc05 (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC).[reply]
Support -- Palauenc05 (talk) 18:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another great Notgeld note, excellently photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:00, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Berthold Werner (talk) 13:47, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:12, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Others#Money (banknotes)

File:Hydracarina.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2024 at 13:13:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Others
Info created & uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 13:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 13:13, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This could be amazing if the stacking and noise reduction could be handled better. Such a shame. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:24, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stacking such characters is not quite the same as stacking 5-10 frames for some landscape photos. However, these are very complex objects. The object is placed on a microscope slide in water and covered with a cover glass. Bringing the models to an interesting angle is already a big job. In this image, the object is at a very rare angle (by the way, you won't find similar images of hydracarin at this angle) and stacking at this angle is very difficult. It is fortunate that these legs were satisfactorily captured in the picture at all. Janeklass (talk) 03:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The stacking errors are quite visible here but I am still impressed by this photo. Cmao20 (talk) 20:21, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Scary. --Yann (talk) 22:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Felino Volador (talk) 00:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:29, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 11:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could use some denoising and brigthening and I also wonder about the size but still deserves the star Poco a poco (talk) 08:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 16:49, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for FP but also agree with Poco that the image could benefit from dinoising and slight brightening. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Others

File:2020aug-derecho-tornado-damage-Kendall-Will-County-Illinois.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 16:40:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Storms
Info created by the National Weather Service - uploaded by -nyan - nominated by WeatherWriter -- WeatherWriter (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A decent quality damage photo of a collapsed house caused by an EF1 tornado from the August 2020 Midwest derecho. WeatherWriter (talk) 16:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose poor crop. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Info This photo is not cropped. ~Gwennie🐈｟💬 📋｠ 00:14, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The scene itself is cropped. What other word or phrase would you like us to use to make ourselves clearer? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note Ikan Kekek, the scene is no more cropped than another tornado damage FP (File:Low-end EF3 damage to a home in Virginia Beach, Virginia.jpg), which shows only two walls of a single house. Do you have any other reasoning besides the "scene crop"? WeatherWriter (talk) 00:38, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm explaining how we use the word "crop" at FPC, and keep in mind that the photos we decide to feature should be among the very best on the site, not just no worse than similar ones. I haven't voted on this nomination, though, so you are premature in challenging my "reasoning." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:41, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My mistake. I saw the comment by SHB2000 above and mistook that as your !vote due to the reply comments. I apologize for that. That challenge to reasoning was directed towards SHB2000's "poor crop" oppose !vote as the scene itself has FP-style crop, which is why I eluded to and linked a similarly cropped FP, which was promoted to FP recently actually. WeatherWriter (talk) 00:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

On the face of it, the other photo's crop looks cleaner, as the only piece of equipment next to the house that's cropped is a garbage can. But I haven't decided about this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:23, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- As uploader and primary contributor to the page regarding the derecho. ~~Though I could suggest a few I personally feel are better.~~ ~Gwennie🐈｟💬 📋｠ 00:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Smartphone picture of average quality. Not an outstanding composition, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry - agree with Basile. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Very good quality for a smartphone picture but I miss an outstanding composition Cmao20 (talk) 01:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination — With four oppose votes to two support votes in 3 days, there isn’t a snowballs chance this becomes a FP. WeatherWriter (talk) 02:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Judge Frank Caprio.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2024 at 16:02:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info Judge Frank Caprio is the Chief Municipal Judge in Providence, Rhode Island. Created and uploaded by StephanieRPereira - nominated by ★ -- ★ 16:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The most charismatic judge in the world! -- ★ 16:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The photographer didn't think his arms were charismatic though. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:16, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination ★ 00:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Maardu Northen lights.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 21:51:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Aurora
Info created and uploaded by Bilovitskiy - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 21:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 21:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:17, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing! Yann (talk) 22:19, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support it is, actually, both beautiful and amazing. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:51, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 09:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:56, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 09:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Man, it can't get much better than this. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:26, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:05, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I just noticed that the word "northern" is misspelled in the filename. Let's remember to edit that after it passes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:59, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 11:28, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:58, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 11:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 07:16, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Aurora

File:Chief Joseph by Edward Sheriff Curtis.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 23:23:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1900-1909
Info created by Edward Sheriff Curtis - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good portrait. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:36, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:58, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 10:16, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:31, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks wonderful and full of rich history. --SDudley (talk) 02:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:50, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:23, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 16:58, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 07:14, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1900-1909

File:Eastern quoll (Dasyurus viverrinus) fawn morph Esk valley 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2024 at 17:52:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Dasyuridae (Small marsupials, quolls)
Info Photo taken about 15 minutes after the current FP. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:52, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Perhaps a tad underexposed. With harsh shadows, it looks like flash light did fire (though exif metadata says no) -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but you didn't use a flash, right? --SHB2000 (talk) 05:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No flash; no artificial light; no reflector; late evening sunshine; focus stacked. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Carls, you find my "blured" area maybe some 0,01 % area, but you cant find yours of some 5% (p.S. Anoted)? Colors go to silver, refractor used or lamp ? Comapred to FP you mention, colors and compo arent there, i wanted to say lean down, evade grass. But saw it is done on 1st - FP. Maybe a QI but not FP. --Mile (talk) 09:19, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree there's a technical issue -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Me too, thanks. New version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk)

Well same problems, double tailed Eastern quoll, with doppler grass around, smaler area is blured but a bit to much, some notation added. Conclusion: sometime stack wont work, doing handfree might be problem. I made one with 16 shots. Too bad it didnt pass. I see you had 2 shots, was it autosetting ? Since it does not look like. --Mile (talk) 19:01, 1 March 2024 (UTC) p.S. In any case i would raise temp to get rid of silver colors.[reply]

Comment I defer to your expertise, but I still like it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:39, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Expertise? There is no double tail. I don't know what Mile means by autosetting. This camera has built in focus bracketing. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:38, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not that. You agreed that there was a technical issue and made an edit. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral A really good photo, but we already have a good FP of this same animal, so… ★ 00:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I know you didn't use flash but the harsh shadows make it look at first like an image taken with flash (though, when I look closely, I can tell it's not). Usual superb Charles image quality but I miss an outstanding composition, just the quoll frozen in place on a lawn. It wouldn't matter if this were the first FP but when you already have an FP of this species that has such an excellent composition, not sure what this one adds Cmao20 (talk) 01:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Strong shadow, unfavorable POV (too high) Poco a poco (talk) 08:18, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pumpkin festival - Ludwigsburg 07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2024 at 09:51:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
Info This pumpkin artwork depicts Jim Button, Luke, and the locomotive called Emma, the main characters of "Jim Button and Luke the Engine Driver" by Michael Ende, one of the most successful German children's books; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:51, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Something different Cmao20 (talk) 15:20, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:25, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question is it covered by local freedom of panorama? If not, is it copyrightable? RodRabelo7 (talk) 18:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment As far as I know, "Food Art" has the same status in Germany as "Permanent Work of Art" and therefore falls under the freedom of panorama (FOP) in Germany. We have on Commons an own category for the Pumpkin festival Ludwigsburg with many pictures and also categories with pictures of other pumkin festivals. --Llez (talk) 21:10, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Support then --RodRabelo7 (talk) 03:54, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 02:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:56, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for novelty. Some of the other photos in this category, such as File:Pumpkin festival - Ludwigsburg 09.jpg, might be worth nominating, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:30, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:57, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! ★ 00:22, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Different Poco a poco (talk) 08:27, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:49, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mayfield KY State Farm CRU -23.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2024 at 07:40:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Storms
Info created by State Farm Insurance - uploaded by JoleBruh - nominated by WeatherWriter -- WeatherWriter (talk) 07:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- High quality damage photograph of Mayfield after the 2021 Western Kentucky tornado. WeatherWriter (talk) 07:40, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support FP to me. High-quality, as you said, and has a good composition to me, in addition to emotional effect and documentary value. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:51, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Ikan, and this is not a picture that can be reproduced. Yann (talk) 10:10, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 16:30, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and Yann Cmao20 (talk) 18:29, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very valuable FP candidate. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:09, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not seeing the "high quality" here. 5,464 × 3,640 pixels is fairly normal for today's age and there isn't anything exceptional in this photo that would make it one of this site's finest images. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:13, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For weather-related damage photos, it is very high quality. 99% are not even 2,500 pixels in 1 dimension. Actually, this image is higher quality than any other tornado-related featured photograph, with the current one being 4,032 × 3,024 pixels (File:Low-end EF3 damage to a home in Virginia Beach, Virginia.jpg). WeatherWriter (talk) 02:35, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per others - very high quality for this kind of photo --Kritzolina (talk) 07:49, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 10:59, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina. Often news photos are of much lower quality. --Aristeas (talk) 15:14, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a pharse here. When you check autopark, all SUV's and than the result. Some vibrance would be nice. --Mile (talk) 09:01, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:14, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:40, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Storms

File:Dust storm approaching Stratford, Texas.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2024 at 10:20:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1930-1939
Info created by George Everett Marsh Jr., restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann
Support Restoration of historical image, used in many articles across all Wikimedia projects. The exact date it was taken is known. I even found who is the photographer. See his story here. Obviously the original picture got a lot of dust. I imagine it is difficult to keep a clean camera in this environment. FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 10:20, 23 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very striking portrayal. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:15, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:18, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 16:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for historical value. Cmao20 (talk) 01:27, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1930-1939

File:Translation of St Martin church in St-Ignat (17).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 15:43:58 (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) 15:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 15:43, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unsure why no votes, very serene and well composed - definite FP to me Cmao20 (talk) 01:00, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Taken from too far away, in my opinion. The tree is hiding half of the building. Not a special architecture. Average composition with distracting roads and shadows in the foreground, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very pleasant mood and decent composition - not concerned about the trees, that's just how the scene is IRL, although agree with Basile that there is maybe a little too much road. However, it's a fairly ordinary church and the technical quality isn't enough to make it spectacular. I have the same camera and tend to avoid using the kit lens whenever possible as it just doesn't offer enough detail or sharpness (I think it's no coincidence that none of my FPs were taken with this lens). BigDom (talk) 04:07, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same like above, you have nicer shots with more interesting subjects and light, this one lacks wow Poco a poco (talk) 08:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:St John the Baptist church in Calmont (8).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 15:45:46 (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) 15:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 15:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I can't quantify in words but there is something about this image that is off, especially due to the lack of salience. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Salience? ★ 15:05, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Salience is what grabs your attention when you first look at the image. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Like the play of all the brown tones but regretfully, for salience, IMHO - not enough wow.--GRDN711 (talk) 21:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A bit unsharp at the top of the tower but a great scenic composition with lots to look at, subtle leading lines, and lovely colours Cmao20 (talk) 01:02, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree, subject, compo, detail, light, overall lacks wow IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 08:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:At Santos, Brazil 2017 161.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2024 at 00:41:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows
Info Rose window, Basilica of St. Anthony, Santos, Brazil. It is a neo-Ghotic Catholic church inaugurated in 1945. Created and uploaded by Mike Peel - nominated by ★ -- ★ 00:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support An unusual outdoor view of a stained glass window. -- ★ 00:41, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 00:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Great motif and per nomination, very distinctive. Image quality (sharpness) maybe a little below our best. Cmao20 (talk) 01:12, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very dirty. This facade needs a good renovation. Normal image, not spectacular motif, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A renovation could end in the elimination of the perception of oldness, I think that this state is the correct state. Giving a serious analogy like trying to clean an old coin, it would completely lose its value. Wilfredor (talk) 03:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's part of the Gothic mood! ★ 03:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wow factor is low with this level of filth. It's not a question of accuracy (cf. coin) nor a question of technical quality. Just a matter of aesthetics. And apart from the facade, the glass is blueish with no depth. Poor light. Perhaps better from inside -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note that quite a lot of Santos needs a good renovation! Which is one of the reasons why I spent so long there documenting it for Commons. ;-) This is actually in quite good repair compared a lot of other buildings in the area, and this church is actually right on the beachfront (beach was directly behind me on this photo), which adds to their challenge. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But that's an excellent picture for documentation on Commons. Thanks for the upload. Just not one of the best of the website in my opinion. Featured pictures need more than "being useful" -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

P.S., File:At Santos, Brazil 2017 170.jpg is the inside. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not a FP either (too high ISO), but an interesting image for sure. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:10, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I have to agree with Basile, unspectacular light, detail just ok, not beautiful due to dirt Poco a poco (talk) 08:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support as photographer. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 12:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great pic. The decay of Santos is incredibly well portrayed. --Joalpe (talk) 14:08, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

[No] Canvassed vote. See Voting issues with Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton and Joalpe. Very sad to see that no lesson was learnt from this episode. It looks like Joalpe does not visit FPC to participate constructively, but just to support the Brazilian friend. Previous vote was also for a Brazilian candidature nominated by the same in 2021. And older archives are even more explicit. This team really doesn't understand the goal of the FPC section, which aims to promote the best images of Commons, not to support exclusively the Brazilian friends -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, I don't think this represent the whole picture. See [4] for this discussion, and rebuttal by Joalpe. Yann (talk) 15:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, see also

Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Giant anteater at MAV-USP.jpg
Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/MAV Canidae.
Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Suíno alta.jpg (fixed today)
Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Avestruz alta.jpg/2 (fixed today) -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:43, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) — Preceding undated comment was added at 16:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile, and I definitely prefer the photo of this rose window from the interior and prefer that view in general vs the much less interesting view of the rose window of any cathedral from the outside, probably without exception. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:08, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Opposers won. ★ 09:40, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I comment a bit after the battle, but I would have love to have an FP with this kind of subject, however the assymetric framing/crop is really disturbing. --PierreSelim (talk) 11:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Magdalensberg Filialkirche hll. Helena und Maria Magdalena NW-Ansicht 29032023 3697.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2024 at 01:21:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Austria
Info Superb image quality and compelling composition in this beautiful photo of an Austrian church. created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find this church building uninspiring, and the composition, while perfectly nice, is not really special to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:04, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:36, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan Kekek. -- Karelj (talk) 11:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Cmao20 (talk) 12:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 12:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Catedral, Narbona, Francia, 2023-01-08, DD 135-137 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2024 at 21:37:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#France
Info Interior view of the main nave of the Cathedral in Narbonne, France. The Roman Catholic church is dedicated to Saints Justus and Pastor and it begun its construction in 1272. The choir was finished in 1332, but the rest of the gothic building was never completed, as the result of many factors including sudden changes in the economic status of Narbonne, its unusual size and geographical location (to complete it would have meant demolishing the city wall) and financial constraints. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:37, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Exquisite, but I think you have gone a little bit far in reducing the highlights on the stained glass windows. They should be bright, they're a little too much of a dull grey at the moment. Cmao20 (talk) 21:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Good feedback, Cmao20, you're right, I adjusted it. Thanks! Poco a poco (talk) 22:55, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent, thank you! Cmao20 (talk) 23:05, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wilfredor (talk) 22:34, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:35, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 02:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:17, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm liking this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:10, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:45, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just irresistible! -- Radomianin (talk) 06:50, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 11:10, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 15:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:19, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 21:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 21:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:56, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:43, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 06:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Catedral Basílica de Salvador Nave 2021-6674.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2024 at 16:52:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Brazil
Info View of nave and chancel, Cathedral Basilica of Salvador, Bahia, Brazil. Built by the Society of Jesus as part of a large Jesuit monastic and educational complex, the church is the seat of the city's Roman Catholic Archdiocese. Created and uploaded by Prburley - nominated by ★ -- ★ 16:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 16:52, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ghosts. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:06, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Much better than the other one but still maybe not one of our most detailed church interiors at full size, nevertheless nice light and satisfying composition Cmao20 (talk) 21:44, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with both Charles and Cmao20, so I'm undecided. Deserves the QI designation, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:01, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Ultimately, I think that for this to have been an FP, it would have been necessary to wait for a view that didn't have such distracting ghosts. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination ★ 19:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why would you withdraw a picture after one day of voting and with 2 supports and 1 oppose? Don't really get it. Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, here's Support number 3 FTR (I'm also happy to take the nom under my name). --SHB2000 (talk) 20:36, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I agree with Ikan Poco a poco (talk) 23:03, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:14, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:HabitanteComunidadQoM(CDI-CA-MM-00005)-restored.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 22:59:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by AnonymousUnknown author - uploaded by Patriciasalatino - nominated/restored by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 21:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Previous nomination

Support -- Ezarateesteban 21:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Do you want to wear us out? This nomination failed four days ago. Please read this discussion about early re-nominations. -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Worse than the version I was one of 5 votes to feature. Noise and artifacts, such as on his scarf. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:05, 9 March 2024 (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: as per above. This failed a few days ago. Yann (talk) 09:18, 9 March 2024 (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.

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 06:58, 23 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wilhelm Steinhausen - Alpine Landschaft, Tränken der Kühe (1879).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2024 at 23:26:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Exteriors#Landscapes
Info created by Wilhelm Steinhausen - uploaded by Trzęsacz - nominated by SDudley -- SDudley (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the quality of the file is quite high. Add to that the beautiful composition of the image, and I really do think it should be included. The colors are gorgeous, the lighting is wonderful, and the sense of scale is very nice.-- SDudley (talk) 23:26, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great scene! ★ 23:36, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is not the full picture; the image was taken from an auction catalogue photographer. The signature is cropped, possibly by the frame, but we cannot tell. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:24, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Would you support if we are able to get the whole image? I was not aware this was cropped. SDudley (talk) 16:18, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't normally support uploaded images of artworks. I don't see the point. I only oppose on technical grounds: alignment, crop, colour, sharpness, size, reflections etc. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:20, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:41, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Portrait of a Carpathian Lynx.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2024 at 22:07:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 22:07, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Why use these settings for a zoo pic, Wilfredo? Higher ISO and smaller aperture would haven given a much better depth of field. A contrasting Background would be better, but I'm sure that is more difficult in a zoo. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:30, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Capturing a moving animal with the Nikon Z7II under low light conditions presents its own challenges. The camera's autofocus system, though advanced, has limitations when operating in dark environments. This is exacerbated when using the lens at its maximum zoom capacity, 400mm, on a full-frame sensor. The experience differs significantly from working with crop sensor cameras, where the effective focal length extends beyond 400mm due to the sensor's crop factor. Thus, although the Z7II is a formidable camera, especially for landscapes, these specific conditions are less suitable for capturing sharp details in low light situations at long distances. Wilfredor (talk) 23:54, 24 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ah! well you needed to climb over the railings to get closer to the lynx... Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite good IMO. Yann (talk) 09:08, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Better with a darker background. Yann (talk) 22:26, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose There is detail but the depth of field is limited. I find the crop unbalanced and the background distracting (not to mention where the shot was taken). Poco a poco (talk) 14:56, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Its very difficult get more DoF with 400mm, in the description and category mention where the shot was taken "Alpenzoo Innsbruck" Wilfredor (talk) 20:26, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
F11 would have helped. Also, a good candidate for focus bracketing when you all time to choose PoV and wait for the animal to stay still. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Z7II's focus system is not enough for those things. It's another world apart, I already had mirrored APS-C and I know what you mean. I invite you to read about it and have a broader vision Wilfredor (talk) 21:53, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The depth of field could be better for sure but the detail on the head is great and the resolution is huge. Although the background is a little busy, the bokeh is well done. Overall FP for me Cmao20 (talk) 20:10, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 02:36, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:11, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Crop is bothering, left side - overlighted image. Remove or try to lower exposure there manualy. --Mile (talk) 09:06, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done Please, take another look, thanks Wilfredor (talk) 13:01, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now see the difference. My eyes get straight to the object. --Mile (talk) 16:32, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The new version is much better. With a further crop (see note) I would remove my oppose vote. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:41, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The work on the background introduced quite a lot of artefacts (e.g., checkered pattern in the dark areas, masking issues around the lynx) --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done @Julesvernex2: Thanks Wilfredor (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Not quite there yet, I'm afraid, the masking issues on the fur are still visible even at full size. --Julesvernex2 (talk)
  - Please, Explain this better, add some notes, I have corrected the background problem but what are you referring to in the fur? Wilfredor (talk) 23:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - Wilfredor, I added notes. In these spots, it seems that the mask used to sharpen the lynx and soften/darken the background is not quite right. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      I think that its gone, let me see what do you think Wilfredor (talk) 12:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      - Support Thanks! --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:23, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
        remember to remove the negative vote Wilfredor (talk) 14:04, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this version is OK for FP, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:32, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I preffer this one --Wilfredor (talk) 01:55, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:56, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt version by Charles[edit]

Info Portrait of a Carpathian Lynx alt crop by Charlesjsharp --Wilfredor (talk) 17:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Give some space. Yann (talk) 20:58, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree, I'd strike through my oppose vote if you don't go for such a tight crop as long as you keep it balanced, the darkening of the background was an improvement Poco a poco (talk) 21:24, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I prefer this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:21, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't go for zoo images, but I like this with the eyes in the middle. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too tight, to my eyes the other crop is much better --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:01, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support both are fine by me, but I like this version more. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:23, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Missed this. Yeah it's still FP to me but I prefer the original, let it breathe Cmao20 (talk) 01:26, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think your vote was not here, sorry if I'm wrong, @Cmao20: could check if you voted in the right section? --Wilfredor (talk) 12:06, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 06:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Felidae (Felids)

The chosen alternative is: File:Portrait of a Carpathian Lynx.jpg

File:Buda de Ibiraçu.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2024 at 19:14:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues outdoors
Info Worm's-eye view of the Buddha statue in Ibiraçu, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 19:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, it's a giant Buddha statue (possibly the largest in the Western Hemisphere) in the middle of an almost unknown town and in a Christian majority country (BTW, taller than the Christ the Redeemer). -- ★ 19:14, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Yes it's a very impressive place but the image quality is not great at full size and I'm not convinced by the perspective looking upwards at the statue, there are more interesting compositions of this statue on the internet. Also it's visibly not centred even in thumbnail and with no obvious mitigating reasons why getting it centred was impossible. Cmao20 (talk) 20:25, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20: the place has been receiving more and more tourists, so I tried to take a shot from a perspective where they wouldn't get in the way. ★ 22:49, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Could you perhaps centre the image? --SHB2000 (talk) 20:34, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@SHB2000: the lotus petals are not symmetrical at all, but I added a more centered (or centralized?) version. ★ 22:33, 25 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Did you try BW ? --Mile (talk) 09:10, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@PetarM: BW? ★ 09:45, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Black-White. --Mile (talk) 12:01, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

B&W version[edit]

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Black and White#Objects
Info B&W version added. ★ 12:43, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I uploaded a new centered version but I rollbacked myself because it need author approval. If you think that its ok you can just use that version Wilfredor (talk) 14:10, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Don't worry, you've permission to improve any of my images without prior request, you're my inspiration. ★ 14:25, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

better not, I feel that that is an abuse Wilfredor (talk) 14:46, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's nicer than the version above. ★ 15:14, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support In this case, the black & white version works better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:12, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support yeap, it works. --Mile (talk) 16:31, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:22, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:48, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much nicer! --SHB2000 (talk) 11:29, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:19, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The perspective looking up still does not really appeal, but I think this is overall interesting enough for FP now Cmao20 (talk) 15:17, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, congratulations to ArionStar. RodRabelo7 (talk) 18:50, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is it possible to remove the original photo as alternative and thus to be included in the fifth day policy? ★ 16:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think so, but why rush? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:20, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just out of curiosity, because I've never seen anyone do this before. ★ 00:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In any case, the fifth day would be tomorrow 02/03/2024 at 12:43 for this version, not earlier, and the FPCbot would catch it even later. There were recent discussions related to this matter in the FPC talk page archives (as I remember, the answer was no, but you can dig into) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, the bot is also not able to archive a withdraw nomination if an alternative version exists. ★ 12:37, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Noms with 'Alts' can't be closed on the fifth day per this discussion. An 'Alt' is always connected to and depending on the code of the original image. (I have fixed that for your with the number of "====" in the heading.) If you propose an 'Alt' you also have to abide by the consequences of that. You are always looking for shortcuts and fast-track options, but you must learn to be more patient. --Cart (talk) 18:12, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 23:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Photo techniques/Black and White#Objects

The chosen alternative is: File:Buda de Ibiraçu (B&W).jpg

File:Reserva de Desenvolvimento Sustentável Mamirauá Odjair Baena 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 09:50:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Brazil
Info Sunset in the Mamirauá Sustainable Development Reserve, Amazonas, Brazil. It is divided between the municipalities of Uarini (18.68%), Tonantins (1.24%), Maraã (26.74%), Japurá (1.33%) and Fonte Boa (52.01%) and has an area of 1,124,000 hectares (2,780,000 acres). Created and uploaded by Odjair - nominated by ★ -- ★ 09:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Delightful Amazon twilight! -- ★ 09:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quite noisy in the dark areas. And currently poor description and categorization (Not specific at all and not in English). I would expect to find something highlighting the sky, which is the main topic in my opinion. By the way, we have two galleries that may fit better: 1) Reflections, and 2) Clouds -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:13, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer to keep the category, "Places/Natural" represents all the nature of the Amazonia contained in the image. ★ 17:44, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This reminds me very much of this and this, both with even stronger skies and reflections, but they are in "Places/Natural". Gallery works fine. --Cart (talk) 22:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both my pictures but none is my nomination. Thus I did not choose the gallery, and honestly did not pay attention to those. In any case, this is just my recommendation. I have not voted yet -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support JukoFF (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too noisy and unsharp for a FP.--Ermell (talk) 22:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Lovely, but Oppose per Ermell. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:28, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ermell. -- -donald- (talk) 10:47, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Stunning, but Oppose per Ikan (and thus Ermell). --SHB2000 (talk) 11:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful reflections and colours but poor image quality Cmao20 (talk) 12:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Compucorp 322G Scientist BW 2024-02-22 18-21-02 Stack.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2024 at 16:05:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Machines
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Berthold Werner -- Berthold Werner (talk) 16:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 16:05, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are several aquamarine hot pixels to the right of the middle of the calculator. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:09, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can't see hotpixels at 200% view. (Perhaps i need new glasses or a new screen) --Berthold Werner (talk) 13:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can count 5 of them. I'll try to mark them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:40, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I'm now noticing even more of them, another 5 that are a pale light brown and harder to see. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:41, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek I removed them + some cleaning. --Mile (talk) 09:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not letting me add image notes. Look to the right of "2ND FUNC" and "Ln LOG." The light green hot pixels are above and to the right of the pale tan hot pixels, and both sets of hot pixels have the same shape. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:44, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The pen does not look to be the same era as the machine. Is it? Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:28, 26 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was thinking the same Wilfredor (talk) 01:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, the pen ist new. It's there as size comparison and having subtle colours (or non-colors) --Berthold Werner (talk) 13:54, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the pen. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:13, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I find Charles's argument persuasive but also I think this is really good, well composed, attractive 'product' photography Cmao20 (talk) 21:43, 27 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:25, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 16:34, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 18:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 21:31, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the edits. Very good photo of an interesting product. The pen is OK with me, but some text like "pen manufactured c. 2024 (or whatever) included for size comparison" would address any concerns about any anachronism. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:18, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:36, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The light in the background is a bit strange, and I don't understand either the pen. Why that? is it supposed to be used to press the keys? Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality photo of the calculator, but the pen is odd and throws off the composition (too heavily weighted to the right). Doesn't have the FP wow for me, sorry. BigDom (talk) 01:58, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Guess that the pen was added as kind of a scale – without it I would have underestimated the size of that calculator. --Aristeas (talk) 13:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:53, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Slaty brushfinch (Atlapetes schistaceus schistaceus) Caldas.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2024 at 01:21:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Passerellidae (New world sparrows)
Info Very good quality, sharp and well composed photo of this subtly pretty bird. No FPs of this species and indeed this appears to be the only QI. created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, nice one, and I like that the tail feathers are sharp. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:16, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:30, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:56, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 09:29, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:56, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:37, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 15:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:58, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (talk) 04:59, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:38, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Passerellidae (New world sparrows)

File:Self portrait of Edward Sheriff Curtis.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2024 at 09:53:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1890-1899
Info created by Edward Sheriff Curtis - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:53, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 12:03, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 17:37, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 20:56, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good photo and restoration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:09, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 00:54, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:22, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice self-portrait photograph, excellent reproduction and restauration. --Aristeas (talk) 14:05, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 21:28, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1890-1899

File:Judith at the Banquet of Holofernes (previously known as Artemisia), by Rembrandt, from Prado in Google Earth.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2024 at 11:22:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Groups
Info Rembrandt: Judith at the Banquet of Holofernes - uploaded by Dcoetzee - nominated by --Thi (talk) 11:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Thi (talk) 11:22, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really impressive reproduction! I had to download it to be able to view it at a large size - it was completely black when I tried to view it at full size using the media viewer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:46, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't have enough memory to download this, but I trust it will be FP --Wilfredor (talk) 00:58, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Wilfredor --Llez (talk) 10:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:06, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent reproduction. --Aristeas (talk) 19:15, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 22:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/People#Groups

File:SimoOstra.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 18:06:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Subphylum : Crustacea (Crustaceans)
Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Janeklass (talk) 18:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Janeklass: Please fill up the nominate properly: description and category above. Thanks, Yann (talk) 18:15, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. Sorry, you have to wait for one of your other nominations to end, or this nom can be reopened if you withdraw one of the others.--Cart (talk) 18:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

➕ Gallery to fix -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cape Barren goose (Cereopsis novaehollandiae) Kangaroo Island.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2024 at 17:57:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Cereopsis
Info We have just promoted an FP of the species in flight. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why do you think these obscured feet are ok, when this and this were not. --Cart (talk) 21:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can see the foot. There is no blurred foreground as in one of your examples and no huge rock as in the other. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

By 'foot', do you mean that small part of a toe sticking out from behind the little pile of dirt, or am I missing something. --Cart (talk) 10:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think Cart is missing anything, either. I'll Support because I think this deserves a feature, but some more consistency from you on obscured feet and toes would be appreciated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Underexposed~~ -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Brighter version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support fine, now -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 05:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition, need some crop right-above. That tree behind which cross neck could be solved, now gray on gray. --Mile (talk) 09:24, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It does not need a crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Something like this would be more suitable. Will erase in hour. --Mile (talk) 10:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support More than fine for me Cmao20 (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Too much sharpening IMHO, the image looks detached from the background due to the sharpening halos. Poco a poco (talk) 08:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 15:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Dorothy Anstett, Miss USA, 1968-bluish tint fix attempt.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 19:35:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1960-1969
Info created by Bernard Gotfryd, restored and uploaded by Yann and Brandmeister, nominated by Yann
Support -- Yann (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tell me which is more sharp and have film color tones... [5] which has 669 × 991 px or this. Could you please revert to 2nd option of GRuban, since you have now seperate nominee and that one best. In any case i cant support, adding px is unworthy here. -Mile (talk) 20:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@PetarM: "adding px"? You don't know what you are talking about. This version is made from the high resolution TIFF file. Of course, the downsampled version may be sharper. Yann (talk) 21:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support as the other version looks unnaturally bluish (not to mention original tiff). Brandmeister (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 20:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This raw render work to me, look like typical 60s Kodak palette --Wilfredor (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMHO the colours are now authentic for film of that time. --Aristeas (talk) 13:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I took the liberty to change the gallery link from People/Portrait to Historical/People#1960-1969; as the comment on People/Portrait says, “This gallery is for color head to half-lenght photographs […] of people from 1970 or later. For portrait photographs […] from 1969 or earlier, please use Historical portrait photos or Black and White portraits.” --Aristeas (talk) 13:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I dunno: A blueish tint in the shadows of a shot taken on daylight-balanced film is to be expected. Adjusting the facade in the background towards neutral grey is not the way to go here, imho. --El Grafo (talk) 09:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
There wouldn't be such tint in modern photos under the same lighting conditions which to me suggests it's a thing of older technology that can be adjusted. Various digitized photos from that period have similar tint. Brandmeister (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Yes, but IMHO in this version the shadows are still bluish enough; in the original the bluish tint was exaggerated – either a poor film was used, or it was not processed correctly in the lab. Of course everything depends on the film type used for the photograph, as different daylight films handled colours quite differently, even in the 1990s when I shot on film. It’s a pity that scans of old photographs almost never include information about the film. If they would just include the border of the transparency (often naming the film brand), we would know more. – Aristeas (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 13:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1960-1969

File:Farmer walking in dust storm Cimarron County Oklahoma2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 15:56:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1930-1939
Info created by Arthur Rothstein, restored and uploaded by Mvuijlst, nominated by Yann
Support High quality copy of a notable picture. FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 16:44, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the man expression to the children --Wilfredor (talk) 19:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 21:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good find, thank you, Yann. – Because this is a 1936 photograph and because we have already two similar photos in the Historical#1930-1939 section, I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link to that. (Hope this is OK, else let’s discuss it.) --Aristeas (talk) 19:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 13:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1930-1939

File:Galería Humberto I, Nápoles, Italia, 2023-03-25, DD 157-159 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2024 at 08:10:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: ~~Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Italy~~ Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights
Info Galleria Umberto I, Naples, Italy. It was built between 1887 and 1890, and was the cornerstone in the decades-long rebuilding of Naples—called the risanamento (lit. "making healthy again")—that lasted until World War I. It was designed in the Stile Umbertino by Emanuele Rocco, who employed modern architectural elements reminiscent of the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II in Milan. The Galleria was named after Umberto I, King of Italy at the time of construction. It was meant to combine businesses, shops, cafés and social life—public space—with private space in the apartments on the third floor. The building is part of the UNESCO listing of the Historic Centre of Naples as a World Heritage Site. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lots of CA. Gallery was once again wrong, yeah sure... --A.Savin 12:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, lucky me that you cannot handcuff me for that :) Poco a poco (talk) 16:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC) PD: I removed the CA.[reply]

A.Savin: is there anything else I can do to get your support or at least not to get your oppose? --Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I give up after 3 pings. I just had the hope that the negative vote had something to do with the candidate image and its improvements. No further comment. Poco a poco (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yellow is still there. On right side of hemisphere.--Mile (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Absolutely stellar photo with a real wow factor and huge resolution Cmao20 (talk) 01:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It looks to me like there's still some red CA on the upper part of the picture frame. Otherwise very well captured, and a nice place. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:46, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek: New version with more CA removal, FYI, too A.Savin Poco a poco (talk) 08:38, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ermell (talk) 09:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 15:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 14:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 09:39, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Im Naturwaldreservat Wildacker 15.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2024 at 12:13:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
Info Lovely photo of a Bavarian forest, I love how the path is placed slightly off centre and how it and the shapes of the trees act as subtle leading lines, and the way that the tree canopy has grown together gives the image an almost fairytale atmosphere. created by Plozessor - uploaded by Plozessor - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bavaria redminds me of this game. ★ 16:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wondering if the trees are naturally leaning in, or if it is an effect of the bottom-up angle of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's very common to see this with kissing canopies; maybe the same might apply here, too? I'm no biologist. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think, perspective correction is necessary --Llez (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, if you tilt it -25°, it looks more natural. -- -donald- (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I find it plausible that it actually looked like this, per SHB2000's comment, but even if it didn't, personally I don't think perspective correction is necessary here. Shooting from a bottom-up position to emphasise the height of the trees and how the path feels fully enclosed by them on all sides, i.e. the density of the forest, is a reasonable decision to me. Cmao20 (talk) 00:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 19:34, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 13:41, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

Nemocardium bechei, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 08:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Right valve
Left valve

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Cardiidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 08:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent, as usual. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Your shells are amazing Cmao20 (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 11:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 21:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 09:43, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Tribu Laarim, Kimotong, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-24, DD 121.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2024 at 07:01:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info Portrait of young woman from the Laarim Tribe, Kimotong, Kapoeta State, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Staged image; watered face, too much jewelry...? I see they ofer photo excursions for African womens. Then bunch of Western horde is making "pure Africa". Black back isnt helpfull here, where is Saharan desert. --Mile (talk) 08:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is a portrait and therefore she posed. That's not water, which is rare, but rather sweat. Too much jewelry? well, that's the way this tribe dress, that's how it is. Regarding the other comments, I'd only take them seriosly if you were somebody who has experienced such a trip once (which is obviously not the case based on what you write). Poco a poco (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is posed, but still a good portrait, compared to what we already have. Yann (talk) 09:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I do like the composition, but the image should mention artificial black background. Quite a lot of work needed to correct background errors around neck and earrings. See notes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+1 -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:59, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp, Basile Morin: there is no artificial background here. We used a black sheet, I just darkened it a bit so that it's uniform. --Poco a poco (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC) PD: Thanks for the notes, fill fix them this evening.[reply]

Charlesjsharp, Basile Morin: Done --Poco a poco (talk) 16:41, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support nice composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Yann, I don't mind that it is staged. Correcting some of the background errors would improve the image further. Cmao20 (talk) 12:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good portrait. Posed portraits are normal and totally fine; I don't understand the objection. I see a few hot pixels to the right of the yellow beads above her breasts. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Gone, I had fixed it but the upload of the last version didn't work. Not it's there. Poco a poco (talk) 19:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very aesthetic portrait. Looks like a hotpixel on the belly, but could also be a piece of the necklace. Does the lady have a name?--Ermell (talk) 20:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yeah, I do see a red hot pixel on her belly, now that you mentioned it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hot pixel removed, thanks. Ermell, surely she has a name, but we had that afternoon dozens of models, I cannot tell you. On the other side, they don't know how old they are, there is no documentation of that, no calendars, nothing like that. Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Interesting and excellent quality with a high level of detail. Scarification is particularly impressive -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, a dangerous beauty ideal, indeed. They all had a significant amount of scarification, but some of them much more than this one. Poco a poco (talk) 07:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 08:39, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 14:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 19:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 13:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Triumph of St. Ignatius of Loyola, ceiling fresco by Andrea Pozzo.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 15:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Italy
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 15:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe a bit dark compared to the other FPs but very good quality.--Ermell (talk) 23:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This was the real light and colors at that time, this is a dark church. Wilfredor (talk) 00:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 03:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Left side, anoted, should that line be straight ? Painting of edge of wall. --Mile (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is not a real column but a painting, looking at other photos makes me conclude that it is a perspective effect created by the artist to simulate depth Wilfredor (talk) 11:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the dark lower-right corner area. Btw, gallery was wrong. --A.Savin 12:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support somehow--Mile (talk) 19:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean somewow? Wilfredor (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit dark, but sharp. --Harlock81 (talk) 20:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sterling work, lots of beautiful details Cmao20 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's overall too dark. It could be that the weather was very casted, but to appreciate the details it should be brightened. Please, crop more at the bottom to improve symmetry. Poco a poco (talk) 08:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This was really dark, I remember taking a few minutes to take a photo of the ceiling and then when I looked down I was completely blinded by the darkness, I had to wait another few minutes to be able to leave without bumping into anyone. I have cropped the image for better symmetry and also raised the exposure just a little. Please tell me what you think Wilfredor (talk) 13:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good for me. As this is a church ceiling, IMHO the gallery for ceilings of religious buildings is even more appropriate, so I have taken the liberty to adjust the gallery link. --Aristeas (talk) 13:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great sharpness and colors. DEGA MD (talk) 00:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The lower-right black corner create some disturbance however it can be neglected.--Junior Jumper (talk) 10:49, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 13:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Vrucht van een paardenkastanje (Aesculus) 01-03-2024 (d.j.b.).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 05:33:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Sapindaceae
Info Fruit of a Horse-chestnut still in a half cocoon of which the fragile sprout has already reached mother earth. Focus stack of 23 photos. (Diameter sprout ~5 mm.)
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support interesting --Mile (talk) 11:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, interesting and well photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed; high educational value. --Aristeas (talk) 19:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great sharpness and colors. DEGA MD (talk) 00:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 09:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support A fascinating sight. --BigDom (talk) 15:44, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 09:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Zofenhof Augsburg.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2024 at 09:28:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Others
Info created &uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 21:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment No description? Only one category? -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the description, but not specific enough in my opinion. And why this first line? (Seems misplaced to me). Also it's still poorly categorized. See COM:I. You should find something with arches, windows, benches, number 3, etc. -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Striking and beautiful, but, per Basile, more categories + proper description would be nice Cmao20 (talk) 01:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very tight crop, specially at the bottom, but overall it deserves the start IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per cmt -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:11, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile, and also, I know photographers tend to really like these kinds of compositions, but this one kind of sits there and is not inspiring to me, partly, I think, because there's so much undifferentiated wall. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 11:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan and Basile. I find this composition a bit too repetitive and boring, FWIW. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Good example for “a matter of taste” ;–). I really like the composition, just the left/right crop is a bit too tight (which was certainly hard to avoid, given how little space there is in the Zofenhof). --Aristeas (talk) 14:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the thoughtful arrangement of the elements in the picture. Well done Riad Salih (talk) 00:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:54, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 13:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Veronica Lake still.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 23:32:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1950-1959
Info Actress Veronica Lake - uploaded by Pefp - edited by Dmitry Rozhkov - nominated by --Thi (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Thi (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's a striking photo, but was it enlarged just for the sake of enlargement? Do we know how big the original print was? Tragic life story. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not very large, and there are larger copies on the Net, i.e. [6], and Alamy. Yann (talk) 12:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only 1,614 × 2,000 pixels. Not an exceptional size compared to similar pictures of the same period. Thus not a FP for me, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Veronica Lake still 2.jpg[edit]

Info Veronica Lake - larger version uploaded and nominated by --Thi (talk) 14:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 14:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 15:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 21:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 21:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good, but again, do you know how big the original print was? Or is that the wrong question? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only 1,614 × 2,000 pixels. Not an exceptional size compared to similar pictures of the same period. Thus not a FP for me, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I find 2120×3000 here. I suppose if this is OK with license we can take that biger. --Mile (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It is cropped on the left. --Thi (talk) 10:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are better pictures of her, i.e. File:Veronica Lake still, Paramount Pictures.jpg, just uploaded. This one needs some cleaning. Yann (talk) 12:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 13:36, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Alberto Santos-Dumont b Meurisse 1922.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 18:21:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1920-1929
Info Alberto Santos-Dumont (1873-1932), Brazilian aviation pioneer. Picture taken in 1922: glass negative, restored and cropped print. Created by Agence de presse Meurisse - uploaded, stiched and restored by JLPC - nominated by ★ -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Three inventors in a row! -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good portrait. Yann (talk) 18:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Part of his face is blown. I don't think that was inevitable in 1922. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Notwithstanding Ikan's valid point, I like his expression, it's characterful, and it's hardly like we can go back and get a better picture of him Cmao20 (talk) 00:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad photocopy aspect. Too contrasted with strong blacks and blown highlights, sorry. Moreover, focus is on the tie, not on the head -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination ★ 23:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Por do Sol na Praia.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 23:48:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Sun
Info Sunset at the Boldró Beach, Fernando de Noronha, Pernambuco, Brazil. Created and uploaded by Diagoh - nominated by ★ -- ★ 23:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 23:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This amount of brightness in 3/4 or so of the picture dominates this viewer's attention and interferes with his perception of the larger composition. I feel like a similar photo was nominated before, but I could be wrong. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not wrong, as I remember it too, but can"t find it in the archives -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination ★ 13:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Southern armyworm (Spodoptera eridania), eggs 2014-06-06-14.28.04 ZS PMax - USGS BIML.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 13:06:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Noctuidae_(Owlet_Moths)
Info created by USGS - uploaded by Jacopo Werther - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- shizhao (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm still thinking about this photo, but I'd like to add some important information from w:Spodoptera eridania: These eggs are really small. "Eggs measure about 0.45 mm in diameter and 0.35 mm in height." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think it could be argued that the crops in this picture are rather random, but it's really interesting and detailed, and the eggs are pretty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan,--Famberhorst (talk) 17:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. – Aristeas (talk) 19:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. DEGA MD (talk) 17:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:57, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 23:45, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Child herding cattle in the street.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 12:48:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
Info 12 years ago, when there was still hope of having a free country, children running around herding cattle to eat, a common scene in the streets of Carapacho, Margarita Island. This type of common scene but it makes me nostalgic for the town where I come from and one day I plan to return. All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 12:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe not obviously wowing, but I like the sense of motion in it, which I think is the final element that makes the already good composition really work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Will, eu adicionei uma sugestão de corte, excluindo o animal que está parcialmente fora da imagem, o que acha? ★ 00:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
fica muito comprimido Wilfredor (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very bad light. You see the shadows? The midday sun comes from in front. Washed out colors with a blue tint.

The animals are fleeing, captured from behind, as if the photographer was scaring them. So the composition is not appealing at all, sorry.

Ugly building in the background, and too tight crop at the right, animal cut out at the left. ArionStar's crop suggestion will result in a tight crop at the left too -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

the presence of buildings that you perceive as 'ugly' is representative of the common architecture in many underdeveloped areas, along with the living conditions and daily environment on Margarita Island. This place, located in the Caribbean, experiences intense vertical sunlight that naturally produces strong shadows and high contrast in images. Additionally, capturing animals in flight is done intentionally to lead them to the feeder, offering a perspective on natural interaction in their habitat Wilfredor (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Ugly industrial building, if you prefer. But the main problem here is this facade clutters the background, making the image too busy.

Contre-jour with dull light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Bad crop. Only seeing that cattle on the left's arse is not what I expect for an FP. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done Please, let me know what do you think. Thanks Wilfredor (talk) 12:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Heavily manipulated image, and, as usual, no {{Retouched}} template (like here, there, etc.) -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I added comments in the file history because I found it more clear, however I added the retouched template too. thanks. "Heavily manipulated image" is subjective and a common practice in FPC, see [7] and [8] Wilfredor (talk) 13:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Common practice by you, maybe. Although I recognize you are capable of manipulating much more -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Basile Morin: dear Basile, you are creating a taunting mood in some nominations, particularly mine and Wilfredo's ones. Just stop. ★ 00:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Concerning Wilfredor's nominations, there is quite a large consensus at FPC to say that all photomontages, retouched and transformed pictures should be declared. See for example Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/File:Panoramic_view_of_air_pollution_in_São_Paulo_city,_Brazil.jpg.
Concerning your nominations, ArionStar, it very clear that you're always in a rush and lack patience. Please take the time and try not to break our rules -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The issues mentioned by Basile also still remain. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Bad crop per SHB2000 --PierreSelim (talk) 11:40, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: Does the 5-day rule apply here? It has 1 support vote, but that is not from the nominator (it was by Ikan Kekek). --SHB2000 (talk) 11:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, there is a recent decision about that: COM:FPC#Featured picture candidate policy. Yann (talk) 11:36, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, I wasn't aware of the recent policy change. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:50, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 19:11, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Синиця. Кам’яний міст.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 08:06:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Ukraine
Info Park, lake and stone bridge - park-monument of landscape art and architectural heritage of national importance of Ukraine.
All by -- Nikride (talk) 08:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nikride (talk) 08:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not spectacular in my opinion, and I think the gallery is less Bridges (too small in the picture) than Reflections -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Peaceful and pleasant but not extraordinary. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The colour balance is a bit too warm to me, but if that were altered I think this could be FP Cmao20 (talk) 00:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Missing something special here. Also per my comment left yesterday. Perhaps in Autumn, when the trees are of different colors, the scenery would be more impressive -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 19:10, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Claude Debussy by Atelier Nadar.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 14:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1890-1899
Info created by Nadar - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:05, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:05, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Good picture of one of my favorite composers, but please talk us through your thought process in shifting the photo from reddish to yellowish-green. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For whatever reason, this is one of those images that changes colours once you download the image. Compare https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b53118843k/f1 I just pushed it towards standard Nadar-image colours a bit. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, then. Thanks for the explanation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support God picture very well executed restoration --Wilfredor (talk) 14:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and Wilfredor. --Aristeas (talk) 19:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 19:10, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1890-1899

File:Frozen soap bubble behind fir twigs (Unsplash BojuZpqw4zM).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 04:49:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Ice
Info Created by Aaron Burden aaronburden - uploaded by Fæ - nominated by Junior Jumper -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! That's great. Yann (talk) 10:12, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not for me as an FP composition, he has taken many better, but very clever. This is how he does it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive and interesting technique Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support FP, period. ★ 00:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fæ = Tæ? ★ 00:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ArionStar: No.--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:51, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, there are only so many two-letter usernames you can have. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite good to me. Charles, if you've seen other photos of frozen bubbles that you liked more, it would be great if you nominated some. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The file name is not ok per Commons standard, there is no real description (ok, I can fix that) and the categories were wrong and way off until I fixed them. Even the most obvious one, Category:Frozen soap bubbles, was missing. Instead it was listed as a "glass sphere"! #%&"!! – doesn't anyone check this these days??? New users here get a hard time for not fixing the galleries, but veteran FPC-ers gladly vote without checking the bare essentials on noms, leaving it to those who take care of categories and "behind the scene"-work. Please lift your eyes from the pixel-peeping and read the checklist of requirements for FPCs when you vote. --Cart (talk) 13:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for the wake-up call, Cart ;–). And thank you, really, for fixing the weird categories. (I tought they may have been added by some pupil or by somebody with poor knowledge of the English language, but actually people holding a PhD in natural science add such categories. Wow!) I have taken the liberty to rename the file (and this nomination) to something more useful. Hope it helps, --Aristeas (talk) 09:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Mile (talk) 08:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena#Ice

File:TCDD E 68 072 Yeşilhisar - Araplı.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 10:20:31 (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) 10:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quality there as usual, but the artificially built up track is not very pretty. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not his best but there's still enough here for FP with the interesting surroundings and the colourful train Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:36, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sorry, excellent quality as always, but much of the scenery is quite ugly and just not getting the "wow" here. BigDom (talk) 15:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Ivar (talk) 07:05, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kasteel Tarasp (Tarasp Castle) Scuol, 18-09-2023. (actm.) 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2024 at 05:17:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Fences and railings
Info Tarasp Castle Scuol, in Lower Engadin, Graubünden (Fencing) A rustic fence in a beautiful September atmosphere.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:35, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 15:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice but not spectacular to me. There are some good compositional elements, but the overall composition isn't really special to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I concur, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 22:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Average composition, unappealing sky, sorry. The plastic mesh on the right is also quite ugly at full size. Perhaps if the background had been more discernable, the picture would have gained something special, but currently it is neither an extraordinary subject, in my view, nor an exceptional view point -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support There is just some charm and mood to this image that cannot be explained in words. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 16:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Mile (talk) 15:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lạng Sơn - View from Phai Vệ mountain Feb 2024.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 12:50:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Vietnam
Info Really happy with the composition of this one with the couple admiring the view. The nice side light on the mountain is the icing on the cake IMO. Maybe not one for pixel peeping as I only had my kit lens on me at the time, but I think the overall mood makes up for that. Created, uploaded and nominated by BigDom.
Support -- BigDom (talk) 12:50, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I wonder what is the subject. Unfortunately, either the roofs or the hill, I find both unspectacular, sorry. The gray sky and hazy background are also unattractive -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Am I right in saying that the hill is a lookout? --SHB2000 (talk) 08:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That's right. There are three peaks next to each other right in the middle of the city, the one depicted here is the most southerly and I was standing on the middle lookout looking towards it. The idea was to include some of the buildings etc so that we could also see some of what that couple were seeing. BigDom (talk) 09:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Monotone sky, right side out of focus, people also look a little out of focus. I think the weather on this day didn't help much. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:41, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for taking a look. Yes, the limitations of Nikon's kit lens unfortunately include a pretty severe drop-off in sharpness away from the centre as you have seen here. And as for the weather, in our 6 weeks in Vietnam this was one of the better days - much less grey and hazy than usual... Not meant to be this time, I guess. BigDom (talk) 23:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination BigDom (talk) 23:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kama River. Nizhnekamsk Hydroelectric Station. Gateway canal P6211279 2575.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2024 at 01:39:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Russia
Info I think the sunset lighting really draws attention to the rust on the barrier and the machinery, and gives the sense of ruggedness against the elements. The composition is IMO really good, and the fact that the three cranes are different colours adds something. created by Alexxx1979 - uploaded by Alexxx1979 - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice,--Famberhorst (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The varying colours, the rusty air of decay and the light make this photo beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 19:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special moment of the day. This picture is showing me that even the worst industrial structure can become aesthetically pleasing with a golden light, enhancing the colours. Apart from the minor part of the building oddly cropped at the left, the composition is okay in my opinion. Also per Aristeas -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ostracod3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 07:01:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Class : Ostracoda (Ostracods)
Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Janeklass (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The species should be identified, at least to the genus level. --Cayambe (talk) 11:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Amazing, but I can't support until the correct gallery is added. Cmao20 (talk) 12:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The right gallery should be: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods. Then, a new subsection should be created for the "Class : Ostracoda (Ostracod)" in the section about the Subphylum: Crustacea. No order or family have been identified, if I'm not wrong. --Harlock81 (talk) 11:02, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done, as this looks very convincing to me, and updated the gallery link above accordingly. Any objections or suggestions for further refinements? --Aristeas (talk) 19:22, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, we do need the genus (and correct nomination process). Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:22, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:15, 12 March 2024 (UTC)) 13:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Class : Ostracoda (Ostracods)

File:Hydracarina2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 06:52:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Others
Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 06:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Janeklass (talk) 06:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kruusamägi (talk) 11:44, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The species should be identified, at least to the family or genus level. --Cayambe (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, we do need the genus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:15, 12 March 2024 (UTC)) 13:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Others

File:Blanche Roosevelt by Mora.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2024 at 17:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1870-1879
Info created by José Maria Mora restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This picture really has a special feeling, thanks for restoring it! --Kritzolina (talk) 21:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're quite welcome! Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agreed. Excellent photo and restoration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 10:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 14:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Delicate photograph, excellent restauration. --Aristeas (talk) 19:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:01, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1870-1879

File:SNTF Class 060DS.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 00:10:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
Info created by Alfred Alreness - uploaded by Riad Salih - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 00:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 00:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very noticeable chromatic aberration, noise and unsharpness. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:41, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
chromatic aberration Too --Wilfredor (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but per above, I like the subject and the colours but I'd like to see a bit more of the train rather than just the front surrounded by th metal building, and quality is not great. Cmao20 (talk) 01:49, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 05:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pacific gull (Larus pacificus pacificus) Freycinet.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 21:52:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus : Larus
Info 33 gull FPs (too many), but none of this species with its massive bill. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tight crop, left side. --Mile (talk) 08:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

easily sorted if there is consensus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
True, add more on left, and crop above a bit. I think 2/3 rule could be avoided for eye, too much blue. --Mile (talk) 10:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Light and background -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe a tiny bit too dark. But excellent and clearly FP Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 01:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good image - certainly QI and VI but IMHO not enough wow for FP. --GRDN711 (talk) 14:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 05:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus : Larus

File:Bust of Germanicus, front - Getty Museum (2021.66).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 00:23:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues_indoors
Info created by J. Paul Getty Museum - uploaded by DEGA MD - nominated by DEGA MD -- DEGA MD (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- DEGA MD (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The gray background is a bit posterized, but what a huge, detailed reproduction of the bust! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 09:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 14:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sorry for commenting after having expressed my support, that of course I maintain. Why didn't you nominated a set? Whit some of thiese views: right front, right back or left front, for instance? Anyhow, thanks for all of them. Very impressive! --Harlock81 (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I should have definitely considered it but I wasn't really familiar with the process as it's my first nomination. I guess if this one is successful I'll nominate some of the other views as a set. Thanks for the advice! --DEGA MD (talk) 18:40, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sets have to be complete, not "some of the other views". Have a look at Commons:Featured picture candidates#Set nominations above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 14:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 10:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:21, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:33, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Huge resolution and very sharp even at full size. Great work. Cmao20 (talk) 01:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 05:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Statues_indoors

File:Ruppur Nuclear Power Plant , Ruppur, Pabna.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 06:11:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers
Info created by Sanvi Ahmed Saim - uploaded by Sanvi Ahmed Saim - nominated by Wasiul Bahar -- Wasiul Bahar (talk) 06:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blinding lights. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The small image looks quite good but the quality is not good enough for FP I think.--Ermell (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell, sorry. BigDom (talk) 12:24, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose Unsharp and lacking in detail, which is a shame because the composition is amazing. Cmao20 (talk) 01:51, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:58, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bust of Ibn Khaldun (Casbah of Bejaia, Algeria).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 13:18:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures_outdoors
Info created by Reda Kerbouche , uploaded by Reda Kerbouche , nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 13:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 13:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like this photo, but I think it's important for us to know who the sculptor is and how long ago they made the sculpture. Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Algeria: "Pictorial and applied art works are protected for 50 years from creation." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Ikan Kekek, the work is also under the FoP-Algeria licence; the sculpture is in a public place called Casbah de Béjaïa. Regards. Riad Salih (talk) 22:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, it's an exterior. Thanks. I do think the sculptor's name is needed for FP, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek, as per COM:FOP Algeria it does not need to be necessarily an exterior, just a public space (with a few exceptions). At least according to COM:FOP Brazil jurisprudence, “public places means places available to the public, including private property and building interiors”. Cheers, RodRabelo7 (talk) 09:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I still think the sculptor's name is needed, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Thi (talk) 23:44, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 09:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 19:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It may be unfair on this image to compare it to this nomination but I find it hard not to given that they are both on this page at the moment, and the other nomination is a similar kind of subject. This one is a lot smaller and not quite sharp at full size. But the interesting subject outweighs that enough for me to vote support anyway. Cmao20 (talk) 01:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support somehow --Mile (talk) 08:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 23:12, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures_outdoors

File:Vertumnus årstidernas gud målad av Giuseppe Arcimboldo 1591 - Skoklosters slott - 91503.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 22:39:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People
Info created by Giuseppe Arcimboldo, uploaded and nominated by Yann
Support Very high resolution copy of a notable painting by a museum. -- Yann (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ezarateesteban 23:04, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:00, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very creative painting, high resolution photo -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 09:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Finally a good reproduction of one of Arcimboldo’s famous portraits! The 1987 exhibition in the Palazzo Grassi, entitled The Archimboldo Effect, was one of the most impressive exhibitions I have ever seen. If you are interested in Archimboldo or generally in creative paintings from his time, try to find a used copy of the comprehensive catalogue (same title). --Aristeas (talk) 15:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The only true vegetarian.--Ermell (talk) 20:13, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 09:25, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Palauenc05 (talk) 09:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/People

File:Görauer Anger Luftbild-20210821-RM-170741.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 12:32:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Germany
Info Drone picture with compelling light and IMO really nice composition. created by Ermell - uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:31, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination.--Ermell (talk) 19:48, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. At thumbnail size, the gray clouds, half cut out at the top are a bit distracting, but that's a minor issue -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The hedges, the trees and the winding road structure the landscape and make it beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 12:53, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful german bocage. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Rembrandt van Rijn - Self-Portrait - Google Art Project.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 17:14:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Paintings
Info Rembrandt, Self-Portrait, 1659 - uploaded by DcoetzeeBot - nominated by --Thi (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Thi (talk) 17:14, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 17:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fantastic! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love this painting and would have expected it already to be featured. Cmao20 (talk) 02:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive quality, both the painting and the scan. DEGA MD (talk) 07:00, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/People#Paintings

Wright brothers, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 18:21:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Orville Wright, age 34, head and shoulders, with mustache
Wilbur Wright, age 38, head and shoulders.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1900-1909
Info Wright brothers in 1905. They were American aviation pioneers generally credited with inventing, building, and flying the world's first successful airplane. Created by Orville Wright and Wilbur Wright (credited as photographers [9] [10]) - uploaded by Scewing - nominated by ★ -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice duo. Yann (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 20:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another image from Brazilian friends group --Wilfredor (talk) 21:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The photo of Orville is the sharper one, but they are both quite good, especially for their time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Funny that I had no idea what these two fascinating men actually looked like. Cmao20 (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry to dissent when ArionStar considers the set already promoted after just one day of voting :-) (FYI it is not rare at FPC to meet this kind of scheme, or more frequently that one).

Here, the first picture is okay, but not the second one. And I don't think Wilbur Wright, age 38 would gain so many supports if nominated alone.

The focus is on the ear, not on the eyes. Face, nose and mouth are too blurry.

I may support Orville Wright, age 34, if nominated alone -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:08, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:48, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1900-1909

File:Neuschwanstein Castle 2024.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 16:13:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications/Germany#Bavaria
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 16:13, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Different view of this castle. 🏰 ★ 16:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:47, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 12:40, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:33, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great and surreal. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support A new take on an amazing motif. Great to see a fresh angle rather than the same old view. Superb quality. Cmao20 (talk) 02:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --DEGA MD (talk) 07:01, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications/Germany#Bavaria

File:Macaca sylvanus in Béjaïa (Algeria).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2024 at 14:32:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)
Info created by Hamza-sia - uploaded by Hamza-sia - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 14:32, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 14:32, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Good photo but what does it add that the other nomination doesn't already provide? Seems very similar. Cmao20 (talk) 18:05, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically not a good photo, sorry. Sharpness, artifacts, highlights, noise. Inferior to the other nomination. Metadata missing. Added to this, the eyes of the baby are closed -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose par Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:33, 14 March 2024 (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: as per above, and too similar to nomination below. Yann (talk) 11:34, 14 March 2024 (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.

File:Dromadaire d'Algérie.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 18:20:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Camelidae (Camelids)
Info created by Blackmysterieux - uploaded by Blackmysterieux - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 22:26, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I regret the shadow on part of the dromedary, but what we see is very sharp and has excellent resolution. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Light is a bit harsh, but overall, good composition and quality Cmao20 (talk) 02:10, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:03, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 10:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice portrait which (unlike many older photos of camels and dromedaries) does not try to make fun of the animal, but shows its dignity. --Aristeas (talk) 09:00, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:35, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Camelidae (Camelids)

File:Cover to Doris Waltz by P. Bucalossi after Alfred Cellier - Art by Nicholas Hanhart.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2024 at 04:22:37 (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 Nicholas Hanhart - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hey, here. ★ 09:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great Cmao20 (talk) 12:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really beautiful cover. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:27, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 07:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:29, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Flawlessly fine Adam's work as usual. ★ 02:32, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Entertainment#Music and Opera

File:Garibaldi Lake seen from Panorama Ridge3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 23:49:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British Columbia
Info: Garibaldi Lake seen from Panorama Ridge; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Are you European or Canadian? ★ 00:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a nomad, I guess ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support JukoFF (talk) 00:34, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, really amazing view. You could even stand to increase the saturation a bit, IMO. Cmao20 (talk) 02:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. Someone might ask for more sharpness, I suppose, but what a great view! And anyway, the best way to look at this photo is by viewing the entire composition at full screen, not by pixel-peeping. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 08:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support But why not a panorama which depicts the whole lake? --Llez (talk) 09:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It did not pass. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised because it was taken with a Motorola One Hyper! ★ 21:11, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, it has a surprisingly capable camera. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Thi (talk) 09:59, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:31, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Great and beautiful composition, just a litte soft for 12 megapixels. --Aristeas (talk) 09:21, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Kinder Ovo de Páscoa.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2024 at 21:38:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Sweet food
Info Easter Kinder eggs at a supermarket in Colatina, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 21:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 21:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Gotta correct the photo description:) I, for example, without carefully studying the photo, was very surprised that chocolate eggs in Brazil are 10 times more expensive than in Russia. :) JukoFF (talk) 21:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a spectacular subject, and same problems as here -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:57, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for similar reasons as Basile. It would make for a good QI, though. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination ★ 15:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You realize, when you withdraw so early, some people don't even have a chance to consider your nominations. I won't bother looking at this at larger sizes now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:40, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Raising a flag over the Reichstag.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2024 at 23:50:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1940-1949
Info created by Yevgeny Khaldei - uploaded by Yann - nominated by TheFreeWorld -- TheFreeWorld
Support -- TheFreeWorld (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very striking historical photo. This was a newspaper photo, right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:35, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tremendously grainy, poor focus and low depth of field. I don't mind the tilt, but the quality is not up to the FP standards for this period, even for action shots. Compare with 1, 2 or 3, for example.

Destructive digital processing with excessive contrasts, harsh blacks and whites and a significant loss of nuances in the grays. See the difference with the original, or these online versions.

Question Where is the source offering this resolution? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Thanks. The original is better, so I've changed my vote to opposing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per both of your remarks. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean, File:Raising a flag over the Reichstag - Restoration.jpg exists. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I didn't edit this file, only uploaded as it was. Yann (talk) 09:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment (1) Agree with Basile’s assessment of the digital processing of the current upload. Shouldn’t we revert this file to the original version uploaded by Yann? It’s not perfect, but much better than this coarse editing. (2) Could we please list Adam’s restauration File:Raising a flag over the Reichstag - Restoration.jpg as an alternative here? Best, --Aristeas (talk) 19:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I reverted this, and added Adam’s restauration as alternative. Yann (talk) 22:29, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much, Yann! Weak support for this (original) version, as I prefer the restored one. --Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This unrestored image would be good enough to feature, in my opinion, if we didn't have the restored alternative. If others decide they prefer this version, I'll cross out my opposing vote, but I do favor the restoration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:49, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt[edit]

Support Better. Yann (talk) 22:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The restoration improved the photo, as usual. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Improved, thank you, Adam. --Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 09:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 09:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 00:14, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe VI but not FP. --Milseburg (talk) 19:17, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why? ★ 12:27, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Historical velue but not an outstanding technical quality. Milseburg (talk) 21:26, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Agree with Milseburg. Compare with 1, 2 or 3, for similar action shots of the same period. Very grainy. On the other way, this version is much better than the previous one nominated above (with high contrasts before the update). There may be a scratch remaining on the paper to the right of the base of the foreground column -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment regarding the technical quality. I understand your reservations, but please consider also (a) the turbulent situation in which this photo was taken and (b) the limits of the camera used for this shot. Yevgeny Khaldei probably used one of the reporter cameras of that time, similar to the one you see him holding in the photo in the Wikipedia article. These were quite simple cameras, built more for robustness than for image quality. American war reporters used similar models, and some years ago I had the opportunity to play a bit with a well-preserved original American reporter camera from WW II times. It was really very difficult to take decent shots with it, much more difficult than with later film cameras (or with some old Leicas – these are more precise, too). The lens was rather simple (i.e. full of optical aberrations of any kind), it was almost impossible to focus precisely, etc. In the end I can only admire that people took decent photos which such clumsy cameras. Now I doubt that Russian war reporter cameras were much better than that American camera. Considering this I perceive the quality of this and similar photos rather leniently. --Aristeas (talk) 18:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Why different from other pictures taken in the same conditions, at the same period?

FP should be evaluated on their quality, in addition to the wow factor. There are too many striking historical images to promote them all, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:48, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:54, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 11:43, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1940-1949

The chosen alternative is: File:Raising a flag over the Reichstag - Restoration.jpg

Image:Kizil Hauzen Bridge by Eugène Flandin.jpg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2024 at 02:13:11

Info Second try; the drawing was improperly cropped: [11] (Original nomination)
Delist Opinions can change over the years. -- ★ 02:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think we could feature Flandin; He has some lovely stuff, but... you don't get to-the-edge-of-paper crops in artworks like this. They have edges and captions. Also, tiny.

Delist Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

{{Delist and replace}} would be more appropriate in this case. See on Wikipedia -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Still small for FP. My cell phone takes much bigger images than this resolution. ★ 10:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's not so much that it's small, it's that it's kind of artefact-y. I can see the JPEG artefacts in the uncropped version quite easily Cmao20 (talk) 12:00, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist True, the compression rate (only 792 KB for 5 Mpx) is too high, even for the original version. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist per Adam --El Grafo (talk) 09:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist At least, get a complete copy. Yann (talk) 10:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist --Thi (talk) 11:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per nomination Cmao20 (talk) 12:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

resolved

ex-{{FPD}} Please respect the conclusion of this discussion initiated by you, even if you disagree (count the red spots, if you prefer). See also Is there still consensus for the 2 active nomination limit? Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)}}[reply]

Is this a nomination page? ★ 13:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Yes, unless you show us where you can nominate 2 images + delist two, but as I remember from previous discussions in the FP talk page, a delist nomination is considered as a nom~~ -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh right… @Adam Cuerden, El Grafo, Yann, Cmao20, and Thi: could any of you take over the nomination for me? ★ 13:56, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

My proposal in 2019: "Closing a Delist nom is long yes, perhaps we can suggest the nominators to close their own noms and do the maintenance in case of success." -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist I’m happy to take over this delist nomination, if necessary. – @Basile Morin: I may have understood this in the same way, but the rules say: “There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.” This seems to suggest that delist nominations have their own, additional two-nomination limit. That would mean that Arion can keep this nomination. How do you understand that sentence? Best, --Aristeas (talk) 19:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Basile understanding the sentence: "It's time to attack him!" ★ 19:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Arion, I see you have mixed feelings, but please let us discuss this question regarding the exact meaning of the rules in peace and quiet. I am sure Basile has added the {{FPD}} template not in order to annoy you, but just in order to follow the rules. Best, --Aristeas (talk) 21:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Count the red spots, if you prefer" sounds mocking to me, as if I was dumb enough to not know how to count votes. ★ 21:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aristeas, you're right. Thanks for the notification. I'll try to find in the archives this discussion that misled me, to show my good faith here. ArionEstar, your comment "It's time to attack him!" is very unwelcome and quite clumsy. This was a well intentioned contribution of mine for basic maintenance. Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 21:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basile Morin, your comment "count the red spots, if you prefer" is very unwelcome and quite clumsy. ★ 21:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It was an advice to save you time :-) See "closing a Delist requires much more work than closing an FP nom since the Bot takes care of most of the steps with the FP but with the Delist (not to mention the Delist and Replace!) everything has to be done by a human". -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:57, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

+1; I think the FPCBot should do all the same steps in the delist/removal nominations. ★ 23:16, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice if it could, but someone would have to figure out how to program it, and we are lucky enough as it is to have programmers who know enough to fix FPCBot when it frequently goes wrong. Cmao20 (talk) 23:54, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aristeas: , found in the archives the confusing section: "I have always seen it as counting Delist and FP-nom are the same; a nom is a nom. Delist includes 'Delist and Replace', so if you have two fresh photos there, you will get two new FPs (...) On FPC there are rather few users who actually take care of the closing, archiving and sorting of noms into FP categories. Making this a 2+2 rule would increase the workload once the noms are finished and for that we would need more users active in that part of a nomination." -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:28, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Delist per Yann. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist it should have never been even set as FP with that poor quality. Kruusamägi (talk) 22:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per above.Riad Salih (talk) 13:58, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per Yann --Harlock81 (talk) 17:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 13 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. /Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment @ArionStar, you hastily closed this nomination yesterday but didn't take care of the whole long and tedious procedure of delisting, detailed on the main page (section "Closing a delisting request"):

Heavy task. If you choose to start, please handle the procedure from start to finish, otherwise other participants in maintenance may figure out that the whole process is complete. Now

finished -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Doesn’t FPCBot already do it? ★ 10:19, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No. Hence the quote, above: "closing a Delist requires much more work than closing an FP nom since the Bot takes care of most of the steps with the FP but with the Delist (not to mention the Delist and Replace!) everything has to be done by a human" --Basile Morin (talk) 10:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the inattention. ★ 14:54, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hopfensee 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2024 at 11:22:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 11:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 11:22, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:30, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very peaceful, very large, and the labeling takes it to the next level. Congratulations! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:51, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 09:41, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:47, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely restful panorama Cmao20 (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 20:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:02, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Palauenc05 (talk) 21:02, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Spital am Pyhrn Filialkirche hl Leonhard mit Friedhof-5696.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2024 at 01:41:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Austria
Info Atmospheric and painterly Austrian church photo, the misty weather, the colours and the crosses all add a lot here. created by Isiwal - uploaded by Isiwal - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:41, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dark sky goes well with the cemetery.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:43, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- DEGA MD (talk) 09:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 09:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 14:35, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for this nomination Isiwal (talk) 13:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Palauenc05 (talk) 21:04, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Zaden van een Gele lis (Iris pseudacorus). 06-03-2024. (d.j.b.).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2024 at 05:23:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Iridaceae
Info Seeds of a Iris pseudacorus. Focus stack of 18 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I could always have missed something, but this is impressive to me! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning. --DEGA MD (talk) 08:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:47, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 17:10, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:24, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 18:12, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:58, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Palauenc05 (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales#Family : Iridaceae

File:Vitrais da Catedral de Colatina.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2024 at 15:25:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Sets of stained glass windows
Info Stained-glass windows in the Colatina Cathedral. Created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 15:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Different view of this type of subject. I also like the colored lights refracted on the ceiling. -- ★ 15:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lovely motif and quite good image quality but I don't like the composition, it needs a perspective correction and should be taken from further back in order not to crop the two stained glass windows at the bottom corners, also IMO not quite centered. Cmao20 (talk) 21:53, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. Also could be a bit sharper. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:05, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor composition. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the reviews. I conclude that I have a long way to take FPs of church interiors. ★ 12:53, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yamaha Saxophone YSS-875 EX.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2024 at 16:15:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Musical_instruments
Info created by Yamaha Music – uploaded and nominated by Gnom
Support For me, this is a near-perfect example of the kind of professionally made photos of everyday objects we need on the Wikimedia projects, and of which we have so few. --Gnom (talk) 17:59, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 09:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Commercial photograph meant for online use. Maybe bigger and sharper image would be ideal for a featured picture. --Thi (talk) 11:48, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think it's fine but the lighting isn't very interesting. Just an object on a blank background. I would compare to this in the FP galleries which to me is a more interesting presentation of a musical instrument. Cmao20 (talk) 14:30, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To me this looks like a good Wikipedia FP candidate – high educational value, clean and clear. But here on Commons we emphasize the quality of photographs as photographs more; therefore a good Wikipedia FP candidate may be considered as (sorry) a little bit boring here; especially if resolution, difficulty of the shot etc. do not make up for the simplicity of the composition. --Aristeas (talk) 09:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 09:07, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:King Hussain Mosque (Madaba).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 17:13:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
Info King Hussain Mosque (Madaba, Jordan). My shot. --Mile (talk) 17:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 17:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor contrast on the top left. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, and it seems like it's been a while since we had a mosque interior nominated here. In theory, I might want slightly broader left and right crops. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:37, 8 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality with a high level of detail but the composition is average, in my view, and the subject unspectacular. Too busy, obstructed windows, average crop at the bottom, and unappealing light, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info More enlighted and vibrance added. --Mile (talk) 10:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC) p.S. @Ikan Kekek Maybe next time, i find play of circles nice.[reply]
Support I see this more as a photo of the chandelier, therefore I have no problems with obstructed windows etc. I like how the staggered circles of the chandelier cross each other and wit the circles of the arch and of the dome. --Aristeas (talk) 09:06, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:30, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful … ★ 00:16, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Complex but interesting composition and beautiful motif and colours Cmao20 (talk) 01:55, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. - -Karelj (talk) 11:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This seems basically about the chandelier (where is the relevant category, by the way?). But for me the chandelier is not that wow, because in a lot of mosques in Turkey, just as example, you can see similar or more interesting ceiling lights. Otherwise also the dome interior is nice, but not eye-catching enough to feature, IMO. But still good for QI of course --A.Savin 22:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info @ A.Savin this is Jordan, not Turkey. If this is not nice, than you have some strange taste. Compared to you last nominee definately. --Mile (talk) 12:10, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know. But the point is, I doubt that in Jordan it's much harder to find a mosque with real eyecatching interior. --A.Savin 14:14, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cape Town (ZA), Waterfront, Kran -- 2024 -- 2907.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 08:31:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Other_land_vehicles
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 08:31, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 08:31, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ...whereas this one, unlike the other one, is IMO really good. There's something about the rust colours on the machinery against the bright blue sky. Striking and beautiful composition. Cmao20 (talk) 02:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely abstract photo! --SHB2000 (talk) 08:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice, but can you do something about the blue halos?--Famberhorst (talk) 16:37, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

May be, but I can't find them. --XRay 💬 16:44, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's the steel cable at the bottom left.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I tried my best. I can see the halos/CAs at the unfixed image. It's not easy to fix, because the steel cable is unsharp. New version (with other minor fixes too) just uploaded. --XRay 💬 05:45, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay thanks.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:56, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:26, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 08:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 11:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:48, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 09:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Tribu Lopit, Imehejek, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-22, DD 36.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 12:55:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Mixed_&_Groups
Info Group of Lopit men in traditional costumes, Imehejek, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 12:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 12:55, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 13:50, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good and interesting. What's attached to their legs? Musical instrument? Yann (talk) 14:07, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Yann, that's right. I have been searching but unfortunately I haven't found it on the Internet --Poco a poco (talk) 15:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

At least you confirm it's a musical instrument!🎵 Thanks. Very special shape, like a shell. One of the owners, smiling, seems to be proud to wear a different version with multiple copies of reduced size, in the same material. Probably not a very widespread instrument. Perhaps even an own invention? A professional musician would help us here, to find :-) "Ekpande" or bell relative? -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:15, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This, and many photos from similar packaged photo trips, feels very 19th century to me. They give me mixed feelings about how these people are portrayed. Yes, I understand that this is a source of income for a lot of people who can display colorful and photogenic traditions in some way, be it dressing, dancing, fishing or whatever. But it feels creepy and dated. I would much rather feature photos from Wiki Loves Folklore. Looking through the lens of a local, makes the subjects and people appear very differently. The looks that the men in this photo gives the photographer, are eerily similar to what you can see in photos from colonial times. WLF is a lot of images to sift through, but there is a shortcut: Aristeas (one of the people doing grunt-work for WLF) has collected nice photos on subpages of his while he has categorized such photos. Take a look. --Cart (talk) 14:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment, Cart. To help interested readers: my (very subjective) selection of interesting WLF photos encompasses the subpages WLF 2020, WLF 2021, WLF 2022, WLF 2023 and (work in progress) WLF 2024. Some of the very best photos (partially already nominated for FP) are on the extract page WLF FPC. Of course these lists also include tourist photographs, but between them you will find uncommon and authentic photographs taken by locals. Many of them are mostly important because of their educational value (documenting the local cuisine, clothing, arts and crafts, rituals and traditions), but some of them are also photographic gems. Happy browsing! :–) --Aristeas (talk) 15:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Cart: Not sure what I should answer to that. I added the WLF template because I realized that the picture fulfills the contest criteria. Whether this candidate is a good one for the WLF contest I'd leave in the hands of the WLF jury. I'm just nominating this image to FP. These tribes have contact to white people 2 or 3 times a year and that's maybe why things look the same way, they looked 150 years ago. These men were proud and happy to get dressed-up and show themselves. It was a celebration where the whole village was involved and enjoyed. In fact they don't get any reward individually, the monyomiji or ruler in the village does, and he distributes it among all families. I have taken many different kind of photos in different villages in South Sudan, I hope there is something among them you don't dislike. Poco a poco (talk) 15:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cart: IMO it doesn't matter who took the picture. What does matter is: Are the costumes genuine? Do they wear these regularly, or are they just something like a carnival for tourists? Yann (talk) 17:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Naturally, these people are free to host tourists and make a living of the income they bring them, just like so many other countries do, but to portray them just like the "Great White Explorers" did during colonial times feels iffy to me. I thought we were beyond that. Like Yann implies, a very skilled visiting photographer can get the same sort of good photos a local can, photos that feels contemporary authentic in some way, but this is not one of them. --Cart (talk) 17:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have to agree with Cart that this image just like your last successful nominations and more that I saw on the QI page make me feel very uncomfortable for the reasons named. Kritzolina (talk) 19:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support But we don’t want to spoil your nomination, Poco. This is a very nice group portrait, and if posing for photographs helps the inhabitants of South Sudan (a very poor country and always endangered by the thirst for conquest of the conflicting rulers in (north) Sudan), all the better. --Aristeas (talk) 15:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I want to believe that, our guides came from this area, they and the people living in these villages don't have many other income sources. The level of poverty in this part of the world is shocking, but still people are very friendly and you have the impression they are happy. Poco a poco (talk) 15:38, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry but I had to strike out my vote. ~~Basile’s bold comment has opened my eyes (ex negativo).~~ Now I understand that Cart and Kritzolina are right. --Aristeas (talk) 08:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC) – Striking out my comment to avoid useless discussions. --Aristeas (talk) 08:17, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Which statement in particular opened your eyes? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:42, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The statement in question has been crossed out in order to avoid useless debates. --Aristeas (talk) 08:25, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wilfredor (talk) 16:15, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Certainly a good contemporary document, even if a little late. Wristwatches and leggings are certainly not traditional items of equipment. The question here is whether it is a FP or not and I think it is. The red dot on the skirt of the warrior on the left looks like a hot pixel.--Ermell (talk) 20:07, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thank you, Reinhold, Poco a poco (talk) 09:24, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support In 15 years, another photographer (or the same) will visit again and bring these pictures to the village. Families may be very happy and grateful to recognize their ancestors wearing their traditional clothes!

We're not here to judge the people on their skin colors. What does it change if the photographer has white, brown, yellow, coffee or porcelain skin? The pejorative comparison to "the "Great White Explorers"" breaks the Wikimedia Foundation Non-Discrimination Policy and could place the photographer in a very embarrassing situation. There are not thousands ways to photograph a group. Some of them are crouching in the foreground to make room for others behind. Universal.

I find these timeless ceremonial outfits, made of shells and local crafts, much more precious wonders than expensive jewelry. The colored patterns painted on the faces and body with natural pigments are also impressive -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:40, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Side point, but I wouldn't assume these are timeless outfits. The only thing I know is that they wear them now, and I suppose they're being presented as traditional, but of course traditions change and are not necessarily age-old. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're right. Thanks. English is not my mother tongue, I meant "eternal" or "with no age", because I admired in the Museum of Quai Branly similar objects, though centuries old -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, you may know more about the history of Lopit clothing than I do (which is nothing). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More intrigued than expert, but I can say without reservation that this is not Fast fashion :-) Basile Morin (talk) 08:09, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I 100 per cent agree with Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

200 per cent recommending the book Camera Lucida: Reflections on Photography 📖 by philosopher Roland Barthes -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Need to touch up on my French before ordering it ;-). --SHB2000 (talk) 20:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The merits of a photograph do not depend on the photographer's skin colour, and this image in no way hinders the locals' ability to document their own culture. I too find the throwback to the "great white explorers" inappropriate, and thank Diego for making his documentary work available to all for free. Diego, on more prosaic matters: there's a bit of chromatic aberration on the sticks that should be easy to get rid of. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done, thank you, Jules, Poco a poco (talk) 09:24, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Portrait photography is always an interaction between the photographer and the person(s) being photographed. It matters greatly if they know each other, have some sort of connection (be it nationality, gender or skin color), or are complete strangers. It always affects how the photo will turn out. --Cart (talk) 09:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, and one can make similar arguments about many genres of photography. But that’s not the point. Here, and probably everywhere else, a photograph should be judged on its achievements alone, putting aside anything about the photographer. —-Julesvernex2 (talk) 10:13, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't said anything about the photographer here. Please actually read what I have written. I was referring to the style of the photograph, and IMO the style of this photograph is colonial. An essay on the subject. --Cart (talk) 10:31, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If that’s the direction you want to take this I have nothing to add, take care! —-Julesvernex2 (talk) 10:46, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

"Great White Explorers" and "Colonial style" are denigrating qualifiers that should be avoided -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Does this photographer know all these people? Basile Morin (talk) 11:09, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Probably not, and it shows in the closed, guarded and detached looks most of them present in the photos. Please compare with the open and interesting portraits you get when someone photographs people they live among. Like the great people photos of this photographer. --Cart (talk) 12:55, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This particular place is difficult to reach. Clothes and handmade jewelries are very special. It's not easy to see that in the world. Distance, but also accommodation, food, climate, language, communication, culture differences, etc. Overcoming all these barriers is not easy. The sophistication of these art objects is often displayed in big city museums, but the difference here is that they are displayed authentically, on people from the group that usually wears them. This is what produces the richness of this photograph, from my point of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Do you really believe that those people still wear these items outside of shows for tourists? Kritzolina (talk) 08:50, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Did you really go there, like Diego?

But listen. I live in a country with Hmong people. You know? Do they really wear Hmong clothes? Answer: yes. Everyday -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:04, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you know I did not go there. But I have friends from so called "tribals", or better said indigenous groups. I know they do wear some things as everyday items, but not this kind of full regalia. And I have a pretty good idea what they would think of this kind of pictures. Kritzolina (talk) 12:36, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, many cultures have types of formal clothing that are not worn every day, including wedding gowns. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And I think you know this is not what I mean. These clothes are worn completely out of their context to allow a white person to take pictures. A person that did not even communicate enough with the people in the group to find out about some of the more interesting pieces of the regalia, like what is attached to their legs. Kritzolina (talk) 17:25, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

True. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not true, I think. And fortunately. These people are not stupid. It might have been a real event to welcome visitors from far away, yes. A change in their everyday life. And a great ceremony.
Where do these clothes come from? Bought at H&M or handmade with cultural heritage to be used in real life, like here? -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes true. We aren't provided with any information or context about the clothes or their use, just this picture - though the picture is striking and valuable in itself, and we should hope that someone who knows more about this tribe's culture will add such information later. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:50, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The more you study, the more you learn :-) From the website 101 Last Tribes for example (nonprofit project helped by a team of anthropologists and photographers who are passionate about Africa’s tribal diversity), you'll find at least 11 pictures of similar shell helmets (click on "Photo gallery" at the top, see number 79, 80, 86, 89, 94, 96, 101, 103, 109, 116, and 117).
Read also the sections "Culture: Arts, Music, Literature and Handicraft" and "Music and dance" on the same page: "Music and dancing are central to Lopit culture. There are different dances for different occasions. Each dance has specific costumes, music, at time allocations associated with it. Drums are an important part of the dances."
Watch this youtube video and this dancing ceremony with similar costumes made of shells and feathers to understand that these people wear these clothes for specific events, yes, to dance and enjoy life together, and not "because of a white photographer". These costumes are authentic, of course. They have a history. Pretend the opposite (e.g. "Do you really believe that those people still wear these items outside of shows for tourists?") appears completely wrong. Another show with true costumes and the arm of a white photographer at 40 seconds seems eloquent to me.
Do you know more about this musical instrument tied to the calf? There are dozens of dances with costumes in this tribe, Bura, Ikanga, Rongit, Hitobok, etc.
They live in isolated places. Don't expect to receive faxes or emails from them. Or it would be like asking Chinese or Russians living in America what they think about their home countries. The answer would be far, even opposite to the locals'.
Something is certain: they allowed the photographer to take the picture. They obviously posed for this photo. See this behavior as a generous gift, an act of communication, and a touching mark of hospitality -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:58, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You did excellent research! You can greatly increase the educational value of the photo by adding it (or the most relevant things) to the file description. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

A friend of mine has a tribal friend, too, who lives in France after her PhD in Harvard University :-) Basile Morin (talk) 02:06, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

And what is the connection to this discussion here? Why do you mention this fact? Kritzolina (talk) 10:02, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's about Tribu Lopit, and tribal friends.

Had the same experience, by the way. Huge party, ceremony, and all the village together, 19 years ago, with complete strangers, at first. Was even proposed to marry the most beautiful woman of the group. Real proposition (not joking). Have many pictures. 19 years younger. Can upload them on my website (not here, due to discussion below). Many offerings. Relation to money totally different (could not understand at the beginning). Very friendly people, but solemn faces in photos. Was alone to smile, lol :-) Guy met like that, in Luang Prabang. Same age as me. Was employee at my hotel at first. Accepted to lead me to his isolated village. Difficult sleep but amazing experience. So welcoming people, even when they don't know you before -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this is a great group portrait. Whether it's similar to colonial photos or not would be easier for me to judge if I were looking at some examples by comparison, but I have no hesitation in supporting this photo. I'm wondering whether ethnographic photos are the frame of reference for the idea of colonial photography that's being discussed in this thread. The extent to which anthropologists were part of imperialist systems or fundamental critics of the white supremacist ideology underlying them varied, but the father of modern anthropology, Franz Boas, was born in 1858 and was already active in the 1880s, and he and his students rejected white supremacy and pseudo-scientific cultural evolutionism, which held that white people were more evolved than non-white people and that non-white people were "living ancestors" of white people. But the context in which Boaz and his students worked, doing groundbreaking ethnological studies, was very different from the context of someone traveling to a foreign country to photograph people today. So even if this photo is similar in style to ethnographic photos of yesteryear, it wouldn't have the same meaning because the intent of the photographer, his relationship (or lack of relationship) with the subjects, the reactions of the viewers and the political and technological situation are all different from 90 or more years ago. All that aside, I just think this is an excellent composition and cool to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Even if my gut feeling weighs lightly in this discussion, perhaps you could consider what a black photojournalist who has done a Ph.D. on the subject has to say about this kind of photography. In the aforementioned essay she writes: "Further, even as these photographers strive to bring awareness and knowledge to the privileged nations and populations of the world via their images, they often unknowingly reproduce in those photos the same implicit biases that first pictorially rendered minorities as less-than-human." The whole text is worth a read. --Cart (talk) 01:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I had a look at the essay, but I was hoping to see some images in it that showed what she was talking about. My mother was an anthropologist, so I surely believe that racism and white supremacy - and other types of power imbalances - in photography are relevant issues. If I saw anything that seemed offensive in this photo, I might react differently to it, so I respect anyone who does. But as it is, I just like the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:50, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I disagree with the criticism. We should let the people of this tribe decide for themselves how they want to be shown on camera and how they want to represent their culture. Trust them to have agency in this matter rather than making decisions that it's 'colonialist' on their behalf. The picture is great. Cmao20 (talk) 02:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I don't think images that are prime examples of White gaze and Imperial gaze should be among our finest. --Kritzolina (talk) 08:41, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think this vote is fair and accurate. I'd be more careful with images of beggars or slums but the people you see here are 1) proud 2) happy and 3) enjoying what they do. I see absolutely no problem to document that, specially if these images help the articles on Wikipedia. But I guess that you should be there and experience it to judge it properly. I find it also fascinating that these kind of images seem to cause more concerns than zoo photos of captive animals. Poco a poco (talk) 18:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I can't believe you wrote that! I have read a lot of ugly things here on FPC, but that is the worst. We are talking about human beings here, and you find it "fascinating" that we show more concern for them than "zoo photos of captive animals". This is just too much... --Cart (talk) 21:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why what he's written is at all bad. Poco is talking about consent and agency, the fact that these are human beings with free will, have freely chosen to consent to this shot, and have some control over the way they are presented in the photograph and the way their culture is presented. He is in my view quite right to argue that there's a case that this photograph is more ethical than, say, a photograph of an animal in a zoo that has no control over its situation and is on show to be gawped at by spectators all day long. To argue, as you seem to be doing, that in so doing Poco is devaluing their humanity and comparing them to zoo animals, seems a very uncharitable reading both of content and tone.

I have the utmost respect for you as a contributor but in this discussion I have to say I firmly disagree with your perspective, probably for the first time ever on Commons. I have yet to see any of the critics of the picture give a good answer to the question of exactly what, if this picture is not okay, should an FP of an indigenous tribe in Africa and their culture look like?

The closest you get is when you mention the 'open and interesting portraits you get when someone photographs people they live among' in contrast to the expressions in this photograph, but if you wait for someone who lives among the Lopit tribe to produce an FP quality photo, I fear you will be waiting for a long time. And besides, how do we know that their expressions are, as you put it, 'closed, guarded and detached'? It seems just as plausible to me that they see having their photo taken as a serious occasion in which they should present a solemn version of themselves so as to give the best impression of themselves and their culture as possible, rather like the reason why Victorians didn't smile when they had their portraits taken. I have no idea whether this is true or whether they are in fact 'closed and guarded' but it doesn't matter.

It all seems like second-guessing people's motives and deciding on behalf of the people involved that consensual transactions between people are in fact exploitative. And in practice, even if not in theory, it all adds up to saying that no picture anyone could take of the Lopit tribe or similar cultures would be acceptable at FP. I don't like that. They have chosen to show us something of their culture. Whether we choose to interpret that in the shallow and reductionist lens of colonialist ethnography, or with some real sensitivity, respect and appreciation for their sophistication and intelligence, is entirely on us. But it's not the fault of this photograph. Cmao20 (talk) 22:10, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

First of all I want to answer to the accusation of "unfairness" - most judgements on the FP pages are unfair in some way, as they are usually highly subjective. There are a few votes based on technical issues that clearly make an image not eligible for FP, but otherwise there is always some subjectivity in the votes. Is a slight blur acceptable or not? Is the crop good or bad? We all sometimes find the votes of others unfair, because we see these issues differently. So yes, my vote is unfair in a way, but we cannot avoid being unfair when we give opposing votes.

But because you chose those words, I want to make it clear that I don't want to judge you as a photographer with my vote (Which I think should be clear anyways, but I know how often these lines are not clear). You did the best job you could under the circumstances and I truly believe you spent a lot of time and effort to take the least colonial and/or disctimintating images you could.

And still ... we live in a world that has a lot of power imbalance and your pictures reflect that in a way I subjectively cannot support. For you those people look "1) proud 2) happy and 3) enjoying what they do." To me this looks like they are faking those emotions because they are paid to look that way. But as you rightly point out, I wasn't there, I can't know. You also can't know for sure. I cannot judge the image based on the assumptions of what those people feel, I have no idea what they feel. I can only judge the image based on what I see in the image. And what I see is a colonial narrative about how people in Africa live. This narrative is nothing I want to display as one of our best images on the site. --Kritzolina (talk) 09:02, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

If you want to see what photos in a colonial style looks like, there is a good cross-section of such in Category:1910 in Malawi. The style in them looks very much like the style in this and other photos from the same session. The photos from 1910 may be a genuine effort to document people and their lives, but unfortunately this photography style is tainted by an oppressing history[12] and I think we should avoid it for FPs. Browsing through Category:Wiki Loves Africa All Images, you get a very different vibe. --Cart (talk) 11:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for that link. I've started looking through it. So far, the photos that look most similar to this one are taken in a similar way that class photos (such as of high school or elementary school classes) have traditionally been taken. There can be a power dynamic in those, too, if they're shot by administrators, though they're often taken by fellow students (I know my high school picture was, but it wasn't quite in this style; I have at least one elementary school picture that includes me that was taken in this style). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think you should compare photos taken for the study of scientific racism with class photos. (Or are we talking about different links and photos?) Please read the texts (to the left) that go with the photos. The photos in that link were taken under humiliating circumstances, and the emotional scars are still vivid among the groups that were submitted to these studies. Sweden was no exception, we did the same to the Sámis and the restitutions are ongoing. --Cart (talk) 16:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

For the record, how could I compare picture like this one with zoo photos? That was never my intention and suggesting that feels like a blow below the belt line. I was talking about the ethics behind it. Thank you for your answer to Cart's comments, Cmao20! Again, I see nothing wrong with this picture and I believe this also needs to be documented and no, there are no cameras, cell phones or even electricity there. Expecting that a local makes a "proper" documentation is not realistic and I really wonder whether it would look in a way much different like here. With the first FPC of this trip that I proposed nobody seemed to have a problem, and I'm not sure what the big difference is. I will now refrain though from commenting any other opinions here or elaborating mine because I feel that I repeat myself. Thank you. Poco a poco (talk) 17:53, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The first picture actually made me so uncomfortable, I was not able to gather my thoughts enough to oppose. Kritzolina (talk) 17:58, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

To tell the truth, I've grown so tired of all the times the boys here at FPC nominate yet another naked or sexualized woman and call it art, I've grown numb to it. Protesting all of these, and you quickly get the stamp of being a raving feminist. Just like in real life, me and other women often turn a blind eye to such things, or we would be angry most of the time. It would be impossible to stay friendly and get along with men in photo communities like this. We often have to go along to get along. Sad but true. It is easier to speak up about men in a male forum. --Cart (talk) 18:12, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I understand. I could see how the photo of the woman could be uncomfortable to look at. I realize what baggage there is in white people making images of exoticized topless or naked women. But the nude is indeed a long-established artistic motif, with all the baggage it brings with it, and while I think this discussion is legitimate and important and thank you and Kritzolina for leading it, it hasn't so far convinced me to oppose these nominations, though I'll certainly continue thinking about it long after this nomination is over. In terms of the 1910 photos, I looked at more of them just now and did look at the captions. The one of "Slave Women" should be tough for anyone to contemplate, and should make people think seriously about the context of all the other photos of Livingstonia. I'm not sympathetic to the argument that photographing naked people and showing those photos is wrong, though, and by no means do all feminists argue against erotica. For example, I know a woman who consciously paints male nudes with the female gaze. In many facets of life, it's the power dynamic and not whether people are nude or not that messes things up. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:40, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Of course nudes are legit artistic motifs and you are right about what you say, but it's the female body that is so often overrepresented due to the baggage of how art was made up until now, and it gets frustrating after a while. Although things are happening in the real world and men appear in advertising campaigns in ways only women were shown before, it will take some time until such changes reaches FPC and similar photo communities. --Cart (talk) 23:21, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely. And it's horrible that the women's rights that my mother fought so hard for now have to be fought for again and regained here in the U.S. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:55, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think your and Kritzolina's criticisms of this photo and that one are fair, just to be perfectly clear. So I'm thinking about it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:46, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for reading with an open mind and thinking things through. Kritzolina (talk) 10:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure thing. I used to teach and lead discussions in class about issues of race, class, gender and other power dynamics as part of the music history and survey courses I used to teach. These are issues in any facet of human expression, and that certainly includes painting and photography. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I asked one of my indigenous friends what his thoughts on this picture are. He allowed me to quote him here. These are his words: "I didn't find anything to admire in this image. In the picture I cant see any pride these people might be feeling in this attire and pose. My concern is that is this the part of their culture, do they really want to preserve it or its a compulsion. If this is done for the sake of earning money, then I would tell it is mockery of the civilisation." I think this opinion adds additional food for thoughts. --Kritzolina (talk) 15:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 08:56, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, Cmao20, for sharing this intelligent and nuanced point of view above. Very convincing, yes -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:39, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
🌱 Question Read something like "prime examples of White gaze" on this page, then a few lines below "yes, my vote is unfair in a way, but it is not the only unfair way." Ladies & guys, do you often cast unfair votes like that, and then claim Yes, unfair way ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:34, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I thought Cart made her point very clearly, in that subjectivity is per se in a way "unfair". I don't see what needs defending in that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:57, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think you mean Kritzolina, right? ;-) --Cart (talk) 16:18, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Both of you, but Kritzolina made the point about subjectivity being "unfair", yes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see the sentence has been changed. Always try to be fair, personally -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:06, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, Kritzolina's review. Above discussion is about feminism, "nude(s)", topless and naked women. Candidate picture is different topic -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:13, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Kritzolina and last sentence of this comment. --A.Savin 22:19, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:17, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment My support is simpler and more logical: Wow and good quality = FP. Period. ★ 17:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 18:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Mixed_&_Groups

File:Blick in den Inselosten von Baltrum (Nationalpark niedersächsisches Wattenmeer).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 07:23:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Lower_Saxony
Info created & uploaded by Stephan Sprinz – nominated by Ivar (talk) 07:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:23, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blinding sun. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's the nature of the sun - it's blinding if you look at it without your glasses) And the photo captures it beautifully) JukoFF (talk) 14:00, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Overprocessed? ★ 15:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overprocessed, horizon is bulging. A FP needs a better presenttion of the sun. --Milseburg (talk) 19:13, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I kind of disagree with the criticisms although I understand them. It's IMO okay to have the sun blown out because after all the Sun is blindingly bright. The composition is nice, I like the contrails in the sky, the dune in the foreground and the path in the midground. Personally I think the author has pushed the saturaton a little bit too high but I have seen far more overprocessed pictures succeed on this page. Cmao20 (talk) 02:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the contrast between the darkness left and the brightness right --Llez (talk) 09:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per SHB2000. -- Karelj (talk) 11:29, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Llez. --Aristeas (talk) 08:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like this photo very much. It looks like the main objection from supporters and opposers is that the colors may be oversaturated. Stephan Sprinz, what do you think about that, and if it seems like a fair criticism to you, would you consider dialing back the saturation a bit? I should say, I don't think objections to the sun being blown are reasonable. If the sun weren't blown, everything else would be too dark. The other question is about the alignment of the horizon, and that's something Stephan could edit, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Beautiful, but the blue sign spoils it all. Yann (talk) 00:00, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree with Milseburg, nice mood but the burnt sun spot is too big Poco a poco (talk) 09:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Mhm, it seems, your voting-icon isn't corresponding to your comment. Milseburg (talk) 10:06, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Ivar (talk) 15:12, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lunatisporites transversundatus (Jansonius, 1962) Fisher, 1979.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 20:44:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
Info Early Triassic (251 Ma) gymnosperm pollen Lunatisporites transversundatus (Jansonius) / Created by Dmitriy A. Mamontov - uploaded by Dmitriy A. Mamontov - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 20:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JukoFF (talk) 20:44, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very valuable! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question What does the scale mean (10 MKM)? There is no standard SI unit as MKM. Yann (talk) 11:17, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
MKM (МиКроМетр) is Russian for Micrometre. JukoFF (talk) 12:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support OK. Could you please add this information in the English description? Yann (talk) 18:36, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ок. JukoFF (talk) 20:22, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:35, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 20:06, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Palauenc05 (talk) 22:10, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Palácio Anchieta Vitória Espírito Santo Interior 2019-2957.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 13:05:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Black and White#Building interiors
Info created and uploaded by Prburley - nominated by ★ -- ★ 13:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 13:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 15:08, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This reminds me of the Samuel Beckett advent calendar. --Thi (talk) 23:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This photo gives me something unpleasant that I don't know how to explain. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:12, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wilfredor: Unpleasant? ★ 00:18, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know, I don't know how to explain it but I don't like this scene, the photo does, but I wouldn't like to be present in real life in a scene like this Wilfredor (talk) 19:39, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works for me. --Aristeas (talk) 09:16, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but I just don't see what's featurable about this. It's a very simple composition of a pretty normal and generic motif that you see every day, the black and white gives it a kind of eerie/horror movie vibe which is cool I guess but not really that suitable given that it's trying to illustrate a place of government. (Perhaps that depends on the government...) In short, fine picture with decent image quality but no wow for me at all. Cmao20 (talk) 01:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand you perfectly; minimalist compositions may not suit everyone. ★ 03:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Cmao20. -- Karelj (talk) 11:37, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support There's something scary about it for me, I don't want to be there.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:47, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very artistic composition, I like the black and white style. It's perfect Riad Salih (talk) 13:33, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've to agree with Cmao20 Poco a poco (talk) 09:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 22:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Photo techniques/Black and White#Building interiors

File:Veronica Lake still, Paramount Pictures.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 20:06:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1950-1959
Info uploaded and restored by Yann - nominated by --Thi (talk) 20:06, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 20:06, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 20:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 00:13, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ezarateesteban 21:20, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I marked some lines that remain on her face. I sort of feel like this picture has been unduly enlarged, overemphasizing scratches and producing posterization lines on the upper right and center. I remember when my brother made analog prints blown up with an enlarger in the 70s. They were high-quality. I think the problem here is that an existing analog photo has been enlarged, producing digital artifacts, instead of redeveloping it at a larger size from the negative. If that doesn't make sense, let me know. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

More restoration done. Thanks for spotting these scratches. Sure, it would be much better to have a non-compressed high resolution scan, but we don't. I think an earlier version was over-compressed, which produced these artifacts. Yann (talk) 12:12, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definite improvement, thanks. Still some artifacts on the upper left, which I see I didn't mention before. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:48, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I can't see marking by Ikan, but saw it easily, at lest two...and marked. Watermark on left is more historic and could be left, right one was some internal marking and not useful. --Mile (talk) 08:46, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Palauenc05 (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1950-1959

File:Buddha Vairocana - Google Art Project.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2024 at 17:26:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Religion#Buddhism
Info created by unknown artist, uploaded by DcoetzeeBot, nominated by Yann
Info This representation of Buddha Vairocana, the “Resplendent One,” features several of his defining characteristics, including his white color, performing the teaching gesture (dharmacakramudra), and sitting on an elaborate lion throne. The two bodhisattvas flanking him—one green and carrying a sword, the other red and holding a lotus—and the teachers in the upper corners cannot be identified with certainty. This painting was likely part of a set and only the knowledge of the whole set enables the identification of the secondary figures. Pigments on cloth, 14th century thangka.
Support -- Yann (talk) 17:26, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 23:32, 9 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:49, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Tilted down when going from right to left? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:24, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but this may never has been rectangular, and it may also be distorted over the centuries. And since it reproduced that way by Google Art Project, I would not change that. Yann (talk) 09:58, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Interesting especially with these explanations. Cmao20 (talk) 02:04, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:48, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Palauenc05 (talk) 22:12, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Religion#Buddhism

File:Fairmont Hotel Chateau Frontenac Quebec City.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2024 at 23:16:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the gallery here>]]
Info created by USERNAME - uploaded by USERNAME - nominated by Marc-Lautenbacher -- Marc-Lautenbacher (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Marc-Lautenbacher (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2024 (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: Beautiful picture of Frontenac, however, underexposed, verticals fix, too many elements in the composition --Wilfredor (talk) 23:51, 17 March 2024 (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.

File:Huevos de salamandra con menos de una semana de gestacion.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2024 at 22:18:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Family : Salamandridae (True Salamanders)
Info created & uploaded by Pablaud - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 22:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 22:18, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Cool photo. Any way to establish what species or genus of salamanders these eggs are of? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support: my understanding is that in Spanish, salamandra común refers to Salamandra salamandra. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you confident enough that we could change the English-language file description? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:29, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I updated the description and categories. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:24, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank you. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support IMO interesting, well composed photo and quality is okay considering small size of object and high resolution Cmao20 (talk) 14:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive and astonishing; one of the photos which show how fascinating natural sciences can be. Some minor CAs, but they are hard to avoid here and not irritating. --Aristeas (talk) 17:08, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 17:35, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:13, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 09:00, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians#Family : Salamandridae (True Salamanders)

File:La gare ferroviaire d'Oran, 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2024 at 20:46:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Train stations
Info created by Terki Hassaine Samir - uploaded by Terki Hassaine Samir - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 20:46, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 20:46, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I apologize for the confusion. Please remove the nomination from the page. Best regards. Riad Salih (talk) 21:18, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don’t worry, the Bot will archive within 24 hours. ★ 21:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Riad Salih: This is a train station building, right? I have improved the gallery link (above). If you nominate this image again, just copy the gallery link Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Train stations. Thank you! --Aristeas (talk) 09:36, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ArionStar and Riad Salih: This image is now re-eligible due to one of Riad's nominations being tagged with FPX. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:07, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Nice mood but IMO some way short of FP technical quality, big blown highlights + lack of sharpness. Cmao20 (talk) 12:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20 Even if we take into consideration that this image was taken in 2015? Riad Salih (talk) 19:26, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Riad Salih, the year doesn't make a difference to me, I'm judging by what counts as technical excellence in 2024. The only times I would make exceptions are for photos with excellent historical value. But even for 2015...take a look at these pictures that I recently (within the last 2 months) nominated at FP, they are from 2015 and 2016, neither is technically perfect but I think both are better than this. Cmao20 (talk) 21:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20 I do agree with you, but the comparison is a bit unfair since a picture taken at night and during the day is different due to the lighting conditions. However, if the image has no chance, I would prefer to remove the nomination. Riad Salih (talk) 22:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Perspective correction would usually be requested for this kind of image. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Riad Salih (talk) 12:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zernez, Unterengadin, Graubünden. 20-09-2023. (actm.) 31.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2024 at 05:20:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Switzerland
Info Zernez, decoration on the vaults of the Reformed Church San Mauritius. The church can first be seen at the end of the 13th century. These rich decorations were probably applied from 1609 onwards. See Reformierte Kirche Zernez
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:22, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not big, but a nice, interesting and somewhat funny detail. Have changed the gallery link because this fits well into our gallery of ceilings of religious buildings. It has no Switzerland section yet; I will add it if this photo gets promoted. – Aristeas (talk) 09:39, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 10:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good and unusual. Yann (talk) 12:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 12:32, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas Cmao20 (talk) 12:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Nice photo. Is it a bit grainy, or is that just how the motif looks? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: The decoration is a form of stucco. I quote a sentence how it is described:Hier finden sich für Graubünden aussergewöhnliche Stuckaturen im Stil des Frühbarock, hauptsächlich mit reich verzierten Früchtemotiven. See also Wilipedia Reformierte Kirche Zernez There are also many cracks in the plasterwork. --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. What I think I'm seeing is some quite fine-grained noise, which is only darker and lighter and does not vary in fundamental color. At 50%, though, I can see some only on the green petals or leaves in the center; at full page, I can't really perceive it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Noise reduced. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good improvement, thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:33, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 14:30, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:18, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:14, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The School of Athens by Raffaello Sanzio da Urbino in Vatican Last.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 19:37:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Others#Frescos and murals
Info created by Raffaello Sanzio - uploaded and nominated by -- Wilfredor (talk) 19:37, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Impressive resolution, but we already have a FP version with different colors, so I wonder why this is much more blue. Yann (talk) 19:56, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I was looking at other photos and comparing them with mine, I asked myself the same question and I have come to the conclusion that perhaps when they took the photo there was a type of lamp that emits yellow light giving that tone. Today it has been replaced by a fluorescent light that does not directly impact the painting. You could check the colors, this is definitely not yellowish.[13][14][15] --Wilfredor (talk) 20:11, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Your third link is a copy from Commons, but we can trust the Vatican Museum. Yes, not yellow, but a little less blue than yours. Yann (talk) 00:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, you can't trust them, the quality of their photos are not good and I think the colors are modified. Making special mention of the photos of the Sistine Chapel of which it is not allowed to take photos but right after they sell their saturated and poorly taken photos Wilfredor (talk) 00:15, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am seeing what I believe to be green and purplish CA at the pixel or a few pixel level interspersed all through the picture, and I don't see that in the FP Yann linked, so I'm reluctant to consider this an FP. I find it hard to believe that was part of the artist's palette. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:42, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think so either, but after 500 years perhaps the colors underwent some modification. I could upload the raws if you don't believe me and need to see for yourself Wilfredor (talk) 23:45, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, it's possible the colors changed, but why doesn't the other photo show those changes? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Info That's not CA but chroma noise, and it's all over the image. El Grafo (talk) 09:39, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I know there is noise due to the darkness of the place, but I generally don't do denoise on paintings because noise is information in these cases. When it comes to normal objects, noise removal works but, as in the case of Topaz AI, in paintings the software gets confused with the faces and tries to add non-existent details, so I have chosen not to remove the noise Wilfredor (talk) 11:38, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt chroma denoise version[edit]

Info It was difficult to remove the noise due to the dimensions of this image, I generally don't remove noise from paintings so I had to take the appropriate time to do a respectful job. The biggest problem was finding a computer that could handle such voluminous images. Please give it a new look. @El Grafo, Ikan Kekek, and Yann: . Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 23:45, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please have another look. Some areas of the upper center are notably unsharp. I haven't checked the entire photograph, but it looks like some further editing is needed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In that case I give up, it is a very big image and I need to borrow a computer that I don't have. Wilfredor (talk) 00:03, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Daphnia.sp.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2024 at 16:38:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Daphniidae
Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Janeklass (talk) 16:38, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Truly impressive. Excellent shot! - Riad Salih (talk) 17:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 17:58, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderfully detailed and a pleasant composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:27, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:02, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:19, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support so beautiful – reminds me of some artworks by Paul Klee or Paul Wunderlich … Gallery link refined. --Aristeas (talk) 20:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ten points out of ten! JukoFF (talk) 21:28, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 23:53, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:45, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:36, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per JukoFF. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good addition to Commons and Wikipedia. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 18:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:23, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very interesting and of good quality but could you please remove the purple CA? Poco a poco (talk) 08:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Purple CA removed Janeklass (talk) 15:22, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 20:03, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Family : Daphniidae

File:Wiener Secessionsgebäude Kuppel Blattwerk 20230811 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2024 at 16:31:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Others
Info Foliage work at the dome of Secession Building, Vienna, Austria. All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:31, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 18:06, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 21:01, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice colors. --Yann (talk) 23:54, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:26, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:36, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 17:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:21, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:54, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Campamento de ganado de la tribu Mundari, Terekeka, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-28, DD 106.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 11:02:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
Info Herd of Ankole-Watusi cattle of the Mundari tribe crossing the White Nile from the cattle camp to an area where they can graze during the day, Terekeka, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 11:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 11:02, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 11:22, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry Poco, I often enjoy your photos and I'm sure this was a great sight in real life but there are a few issues here for me. Firstly, the composition is very busy - probably unavoidable given the subject but still the half-cut head on the right and the tuft of grass on the left are not ideal. The harsh daytime sunlight has washed out all the colours and there are burnt patches on the cattle in the background. Speaking of the cattle in the background, there is something going on there because despite the fact they are outside the field of focus, some of the cows have a sort of "fingerprint" pattern on them which must have come from the post-processing (presumably where there were folds in the skin). Lastly, despite the f/9 aperture very few of the cattle and their horns seem to be in focus, which is a shame. BigDom (talk) 12:32, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

BigDom: I've improved the crop to get rid of some disturbing elements and also cloned out half a horn on the right side, better? And as you guessed, yes, the scene was overwhelming, seeing hunderts of those huge cows swimming with the eyes just over the water was an experience. Poco a poco (talk) 17:58, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Definitely better, thank you, but my opposition still stands; the colours are too faded and the depth of field too small for this to be featured IMO. BigDom (talk) 07:52, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Weak oppose~~ I'm sure this was absolutely amazing to see but, sorry Poco, just not enough of it is in focus for me to support. It would make a great cover on a glossy coffee table wildlife book but IMO not sufficient for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 02:10, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, fair enough. I got this one wrong, I'm not sure the sharpness matters as much as I thought, Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:44, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this shot, it would be better to lean down, since cows on shore are not in focus. --Mile (talk) 08:43, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 11:33, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:47, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why should the animals on the shore be in focus? Photography consists of sharpness and unsharpness, this is not an (old-style) painting. --Aristeas (talk) 08:58, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support amazing to see here as well. Tomer T (talk) 11:20, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great composition, but I'm afraid the slow shutter speed is the problem. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charlesjsharp JukoFF (talk) 21:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Ivar (talk) 09:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Perfect timing Poco a poco (talk) 17:46, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:09, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tribu Laarim, Kimotong, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-24, DD 51.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2024 at 12:50:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info putting aside the debates on Poco's other nomination of tribal people, I think this one has a superb composition, excellent image quality, and perhaps feels a bit more natural and informal. Created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:50, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Simple and authentic portrait, but the description is currently not specific enough. Male or female? It seems to be a woman with masculine facial features, and also holes in the ears. Decorative scarification on the chest. With this pipe, the scarf tied on half of the head, and the expression of meditation, the picture is showing someone in a very natural way. Excellent quality and good light -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:23, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Poco a poco, Basile makes some good points here, I think this image will pass but could you add some of these things to the description? Cmao20 (talk) 14:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Basile Morin: Yes, it's a woman, I updated the description Poco a poco (talk) 19:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The image's composition is strong, with well-balanced framing and an off-center subject. I like the natural sunlight, as it provides soft, diffused illumination, creating a serene mood. First vote in 5 months too. Wolverine XI 17:04, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:11, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you, Cmao20! --Poco a poco (talk) 19:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, both, Cmao20 and Poco, for the nomination and upload. This is a beautiful picture, moving for me. Perhaps the composition would be even more striking if cropped a little at the left, but it's a matter of choice (and personal taste, probably). Within some groups in Africa, women smoking pipe sometimes indicate they have had a baby. The pipe used by women is longer so that when they breastfeed, the smoke from the pipe does not go near the baby's face -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ermell (talk) 20:59, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 21:47, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good portrait. Without presuming anything about her facial expression, it has an emotional effect on this viewer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:32, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good work in South Sudan, Poco! ★ 17:28, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's something I want to say, since Poco's work in South Sudan has gotten some flak: South Sudan is a very poor, conflict-riven country (and before that, region of Sudan) that is not much visited by tourists. So regardless of the relevance of criticisms of the manner of any photographs of South Sudanese people, it's valuable to have them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you Ikan, I fully agree. I would also like to say that I chose this one to nominate because I am pretty convinced that even if you agree with some of the criticisms made of other nominations (which I don't, but that's besides the point), I don't see how this one could be considered guilty of the same. Cmao20 (talk) 01:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Indeed, I understood that. I think we need to salute intrepid photographers for going where few foreigners dare to travel (unless they're in relief organizations, etc.). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

In case people didn't understand it, by no means do I view all of the photos from Poco's Sudanese trip as problematic. Of course not! There are a few that IMO have the problematic style I mentioned before, but this is not one of them. In the same way, not all photos taken during the colonial era are problematic. Curators who handle large collections at museums face that same problem with defining such photos since the definition is fluid and often subjective. [16] This here is a more sensitive portrait. --Cart (talk) 12:35, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good portrait of an interesting subject, nice work. BigDom (talk) 04:02, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 17:12, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:07, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)]]) 13:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Cape Town (ZA), Waterfront, Clocktower Bridge -- 2024 -- 3026.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 08:28:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 08:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 08:28, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but it's just a pile with cables, I don't feel anything about that. Even the light or the shadow don't create the WOW to me. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:57, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Sebring12Hrs. I respect the effort to produce something abstract, but the forms and colours here are not really speaking to me Cmao20 (talk) 02:07, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works for me. A composition of lines and dynamics, balanced and reduced to the max. --Aristeas (talk) 08:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support At first I thought: what should I do with this? But after looking at the photo again every day, I thought the lines were minimalist and refined.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:46, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 17:32, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Sebring. Nothing really special here. Yann (talk) 23:58, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:09, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Yann Poco a poco (talk) 08:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Спаривание ктырей.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 20:52:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Family : Asilidae (Robber Flies)
Info Asilidae mating can often be observed in summer on all continents except Antarctica. In the morning they are covered with dew and do not move. / Сreated by Shapomacro - uploaded by Shapomacro - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 20:52, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JukoFF (talk) 20:52, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good details. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support There are stacking errors, and it's oversharpened, but also good composition and colours and very useful and detailed photo Cmao20 (talk) 02:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

So why support? I don't understand. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:43, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 08:45, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per Cmao20 --Llez (talk) 09:06, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:43, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 19:02, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, but a bit on the sharp side in my opinion.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:07, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:11, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting but overprocessed, sorry, not a FP to me Poco a poco (talk) 08:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Useful document but not one of the best on the site, given the numerous focus stacking issues, lack of sharpness and heavy post-processing. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:52, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor focus-stacking and composition is not quite there. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:42, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Basile -- Ivar (talk) 09:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Wilfredor (talk) 00:12, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Family : Asilidae (Robber Flies)

File:Rural Leonforte1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2024 at 23:51:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Italy
Info: Rural Leonforte, Sicily; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:51, 10 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:08, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A subtle composition and not the most obvious wow, but IMO a good and painterly one. The wind turbines on the hills really add something here by providing a bit of counterpoint for the eye. But I wish it was a bit sharper. Cmao20 (talk) 02:13, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. The rainbow is in the right place for the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:09, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:01, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 16:25, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:38, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sicily shows itself from its sweetest, bucolic side; the rainbow makes it perfect. --Aristeas (talk) 09:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:14, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry - rather than adding harmony, the windmills and rainbow seem like contraditory elements in the pastoral qualities of this image. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Giorgio Vasari - Allegory of Justice and Truth (1543) - Google Arts and Culture.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2024 at 05:24:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Groups
Info Giorgio Vasari was a Mannerist painter who, in his day, was highly respected as an architect as well as a painter, but less so in subsequent centuries. He served as the Florence Medici court's minister of culture, and the Lives (his work on the Lives of the Most Excellent Painters, Sculptors, and Architects) successfully propagated the notion that Florence was the best in the visual arts for a long time. This painting clearly shows his artistic and cultural sensitivity during the italian Renaissance period. Created by Giorgio Vasari - uploaded and nominated by -- Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 05:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 05:24, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 16:01, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 16:25, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 17:13, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:28, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support For the hard work and high quality Poco a poco (talk) 08:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 18:01, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 22:20, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/People#Groups

File:Holy Spirit stained-glass window (Cathedra Petri).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2024 at 23:34:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 23:34, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment How about different crop without the part of papal crown and the key at the bottom? --Thi (talk) 16:09, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, you can propose an alt version Wilfredor (talk) 20:38, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I removed part of what you commented, correcting what poco a poco commented Wilfredor (talk) 13:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good image quality Cmao20 (talk) 21:49, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 22:52, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's quite good. Thi, do nominate an alt if you've got one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 03:45, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:16, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Looks good but the image is tilted in ccw direction Poco a poco (talk) 11:07, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ I see no reason why this image shouldn't be corrected for such an easy-to-fix issue. I oppose until fixed Poco a poco (talk) 21:40, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: Please take another look Wilfredor (talk) 21:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better, thank you! Support --Poco a poco (talk) 06:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- DEGA MD (talk) 05:35, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 13:23, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Leather boots men's.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2024 at 18:21:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing_and_textiles
Info Leather boots men's. My shot and edited by my specific taste. --Mile (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:11, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 06:42, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Table setting is messing with my head. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @SHB2000 Solved. Right side wasnt pleasure (teblecloth), + EV on it so not to bother too much, but some shadows must stay. --Mile (talk) 17:06, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Many parts of the table cloth are overexposed --Llez (talk) 07:15, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Llez On purpose, and they are not subject to care, shoes are. --Mile (talk) 11:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support The subject is the boots, not the table cloth. Yann (talk) 10:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Issues, in my opinion: 1) Tablecloth more associated to food in general. Shoes to doormat or carpet. Shoes on tablecloth a bit strange. 2) Weird appearance / processing -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:25, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the black-white contrast. ★ 02:30, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Boots on the tablecloth? My mother would have been very cross. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others.--Palauenc05 (talk) 22:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above -- Ivar (talk) 09:23, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 00:31, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:PepperFlower4K.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2024 at 02:04:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A picture of a pepper flower I took in my school greenhouse.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Solanaceae
Info created by Bst9jkj - uploaded by Bst9jkj - nominated by Bst9jkj -- Bst9jkj (talk) 02:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bst9jkj (talk) 02:04, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question What is the gallery? -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not too good with galleries since this is my first time, but it's supposed to be the family that pepper plants are in. if you could help me w/ galleries that'd be nice Bst9jkj (talk) 16:26, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery link fixed – given that the plant really belongs to the bell peppers (as the file category says) and hence to Capsicum annuum, the link is Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Solanaceae. But “pepper” is ambiguous. If the plant rather belongs to the Piperaceae, the gallery link would be Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Piperaceae, but that section does not exist yet (I will create it when necessary). AFAICS we have one “peppers” FP, File:Peppers in water.jpg, but that one concentrates on the fruit and hence is listed under Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Vegetables (raw). --Aristeas (talk) 17:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing composition, dull light and low quality, sorry. Also metadata missing, and uncalibrated color profile -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:49, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
i added the version w/ metadata Bst9jkj (talk) 16:34, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile and the lack of a wow factor. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree that this is not an FP because of the extremely high standards for featuring flower pictures. However, I'd like to give this photo a little love. The resolution and details are really impressive for a cellphone! The categorization is bad, though. Please read COM:OVERCAT. I'd love to compare this to other flowers of the same species, but your categorization does not facilitate that, so I'll leave it to you to figure out whether it's the most useful photo in a suitable scope for a COM:VIC nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Could have been a perfect photo, if the branch on the left side was not there, and if the background was black or green, if the can in the background was removed, and if it has been a bit better light. But otherwise I like it. -- -donald- (talk) 12:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, but, per Ikan, this is not too far away from FP quality for a first try. You should nominate it at QI and I'm sure it'll get the badge Cmao20 (talk) 15:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Core sampling.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2024 at 22:19:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info created & uploaded by Paaver - nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 22:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 22:19, 11 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting action shot but the OOF leaves(?) in front are very distracting, and I don't like the vignette effect. BigDom (talk) 09:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per BigDom. A shame because I like the mood and the atmosphere. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:49, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bold but well thought out editing: the foreground leaves and shallow depth of field create distance, the selective dodging and burning draws the eyes to the main subject, and the muted colours and punchy blacks are fitting for a bogland. A pity about the chromatic aberration on the handle and hands, hopefully the photographer can address it. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 18:52, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To my mind, this is a valuable photo, so probably a VI, but not an FP with those distracting greenish blobs in front of the people. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 12 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose because the green blobs are just too disturbing. Would be FP without them Cmao20 (talk) 14:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Off-center composition and, more bothering, the green blurry parasitic shapes in the foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:25, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support along the lines of Julesvernex2. At the 1^st glance the foreground leaves are irritating but they add depth and a feeling of authenticity. --Aristeas (talk) 11:46, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice short but the colors seem a bit unnatural --Riad Salih (talk) 19:35, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:23, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Churchkhela in Shaki.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2024 at 22:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Sweet food
Info created by Nemoralis - uploaded by Nemoralis - nominated by Nemoralis -- Nemoralis (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nemoralis (talk) 22:20, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think this "sucuk" looks very yummy looking so for that im giving this a + Bst9jkj (talk) 03:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very striking as a thumbnail, but unsharp and noisy at full size. It would also be better to take a level and not slanted picture and include the entirety of the sucuk on the right and left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:03, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sucuk to suck perhaps delicious, but the quality... sorry (suffers from issues) -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:41, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:15, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others -- Ivar (talk) 09:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I love the colours, but the crop is not perfect and the image quality is not great at full size. But please don't let this put you off FPC - take a look at some of the images in the category, and specifically view them at full resolution, in order to see what kind of photos do well in this forum. Cmao20 (talk) 15:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Blanche Roosevelt by Napoleon Sarony.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2024 at 03:10:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1870-1879
Info created by Napoleon Sarony - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info We have one FP of her (from last week), but this is a second image of her, at a different angle, and I believe there's no requirement to only have one FP per subject. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:10, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Subtle and fine portrait. We have at least 7 FP of Neuschwanstein Castle, 4 of them with the same perspective and crop; so it seems legit to feature two photographs, both very good, of the same person ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 17:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:53, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 22:30, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:23, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 20:01, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent to me. Two related photos of her are probably enough for FP, though. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: Well, that puts a kibosh on my totally-extant plans to do nothing but Blanche Roosevelt the rest of the year. More seriously, I like to check any work I do against what's available. The previous one was definitely the best on-wiki, but checking [17] I saw this one, which, while it does show off the small depth-of-field of the cameras of the era, did focus that depth very well, so quickly did it too, since, when I showed it in the en-wiki FP nomination, people loved it as well. Actually caused a bit of a problem as opinions were so equal. Good luck to COM:VP if they ever try for Blanche Roosevelt (although they'd probably just label 'em side view and 3/4 view and promote both) Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Superb Cmao20 (talk) 15:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 10:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1870-1879

File:Parc Culturel De l'Ahaggar (37).JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2024 at 12:00:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Algeria
Info created by Hamza-sia - uploaded by Hamza-sia - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 12:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 12:00, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 12:09, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support: pleasant composition and certainty has wow, but rather soft. Also, I changed the gallery to Algeria. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:16, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The only thing missing in this composition would have been a motor home. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It's a protected park that contains archaeological artefacts dating back one million years. No motorhomes are allowed Riad Salih (talk) 01:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This was a joke, I was referring to the landscape very similar to that of Breaking Bad Wilfredor (talk) 11:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:46, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good, and I'm happy to see good photographs of Algeria being featured. If the geological structure we're looking at has a name, it would be great to add it. I notice that in w:fr:Parc culturel de l'Ahaggar, lots of thumbnails are unspecifically identified as "Le parc culturel de l'Ahaggar." Similarly, the file description provides information about the park, but it would be good to add information about the composition of the structure we're looking at (basalt?). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ IMO this is tilted. Easy to correct though. Yann (talk) 08:57, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Parc culturel de l'Ahaggar (rotated).jpg looks much better IMO. Yann (talk) 19:04, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. User:Riad Salih, would you consider nominating that version as an alternate? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sure!, but please overwrite the file, don't use a separate version. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 00:28, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yann, it sounds like Riad Salih would like File:Parc culturel de l'Ahaggar (rotated).jpg to be the current version of this file. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

OK, done. Yann (talk) 01:31, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 04:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:45, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is a little bit soft, but the composition and colours are good Cmao20 (talk) 15:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20 I initially considered editing the picture to make it sharper, I ultimately chose not to do so. The soft movement of the sand and the lighting in the scene depict the landscape as it truly appears. It is not a result of any camera settings issue. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 15:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 13:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:View of Suria (3).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2024 at 09:52:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Spain
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 09:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 09:52, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: would support if at least some of the trash at the bottom of the gully were cropped out or cloned out; ruins the wow for me. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:32, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Cosmonaut Don't you think that removing the trash from an image compromises its authenticity? It seems to alter the reality and potentially misrepresent the exact date and time the picture was captured. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 23:25, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think it really depends on the context. If a trash pile is the subject, then yes manipulating it would be detrimental. Here, the subject seems to be a pretty Catalan town. Being careful about framing the shot takes nothing away from its authenticity. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:55, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 22:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support But per The Cosmonaut. That will improve the photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I'd be happy to look at a cropped version, but in terms of cloning stuff out, I agree with Riad Salih on not compromising the photo's authenticity. Besides, what you're calling trash is either all or mostly wood, so it's really not so bad. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:22, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:52, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 04:43, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light and clouds Cmao20 (talk) 15:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:40, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC))[reply]

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

Statue of a Victorious Youth, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2024 at 09:23:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

3/4 Right front view
Body front view
Face front view
3/4 Left front view
Back view

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues_indoors
Info created by J. Paul Getty Museum - uploaded by DEGA MD - nominated by DEGA MD -- DEGA MD (talk) 09:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support High-quality studio photographs of a famous sculpture provided by the museum. Multiple perspectives contribute to better appreciate the details of the artwork. -- DEGA MD (talk) 09:23, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sure! I would also include the back side view. Yann (talk) 09:59, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done I included the backside view in the set. DEGA MD (talk) 16:57, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Pinging @Thi, JukoFF, Cmao20: There is now a backside view of the sculpture included in the set. DEGA MD (talk) 06:54, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 11:42, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:31, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Obviously. --Aristeas (talk) 17:11, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:27, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:40, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 20:24, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 20:26, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bien sur --Wilfredor (talk) 20:51, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @DEGA MD: you can't add a fifth view like that in the middle of your nomination without notifying all the previous voters -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:57, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I stated it immediately after making the change. I'll ping previous voters in case they want to review their support. DEGA MD (talk) 06:52, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Any reason for excluding two profiles and two 3/4 back? While number 2 and 3 are very similar (body and face front views). Arbitrary selection, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:10, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I would have gladly nominated all the views (they share the same exceptional image quality), but it seemed to me like an excessively large set and I could not find any example of a successful nomination of a set of 9 images of the same sculpture. I originally nominated the four front views because I find them to be the most valuable for Wikimedia projects. Then, I followed the suggestion of an experienced user and included a complementary backside view. DEGA MD (talk) 07:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I think we've had larger sets than that, but sets are supposed to be complete. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:19, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, but an underlying problem is that they look too similar from each other -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Why not 10 views? Too much for me. 2 views, maximal 3, would be enough, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 14:59, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Messy set, sorry. ★ 02:28, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:17, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per above. In this case one picture or two would be enough, in my view. A heavy set does not really bring anything more than the "face front view", unless you want to inspect each of the tiny corrosion marks from every angle. It often happens that we take numerous FP-level photos of the same subject, and in this case, the nomination work consists of choosing the best one(s). As written in the guidelines "Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process." Five pictures here (including two similar pairs) is an arbitrary choice, and the whole set would be too much, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a set by FP guidelines. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:38, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above -- Ivar (talk) 09:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. -- Karelj (talk) 09:48, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 19:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Statues_indoors

File:Bar-bellied Pitta.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2024 at 15:10:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Pittidae_(Pittas)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:10, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:21, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JJ, you've done it again! --SHB2000 (talk) 20:57, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 22:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:35, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 21:48, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Educational and good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:28, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:44, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support In this case I would crop out some of the blurry foreground, but typical high quality for JJH and a beautiful bird Cmao20 (talk) 15:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 18:52, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Barbary macaque in Cap Carbon (Gouraya National Park).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2024 at 13:55:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)
Info created by Hamza-sia - uploaded by Hamza-sia - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 13:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 13:55, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 14:16, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It could be a bit sharper but this is a special pic of animal behaviour with a good composition so it deserves a star Cmao20 (talk) 18:04, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 19:01, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 20:56, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good and the better of the two nominees. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:52, 13 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:33, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:45, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The image, featuring a hazy Barbary macaque, suffers from inadequate focus and clarity, with distracting background items and uneven lighting reducing the overall quality, resulting in overexposure and underexposure. Wolverine XI 09:41, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Wolverine XI the image suffers from inadequate focus and clarity, can you tell us where exactly? Riad Salih (talk) 13:23, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is a cute and good picture but the lighting (with the whole scene in shadow) couldn't be worse --Poco a poco (talk) 14:51, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly a valid and standard objection, but I would say that sometimes, being in shadow gives emphasis, much like in music, a passage that's subito p can be emphasized in a striking way that a garden-variety ff passage is not. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:46, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:15, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor technical quality and poor crop Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)

File:Watching the Dancers by Edward S. Curtis 1906 - restored.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2024 at 12:20:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1900-1909
Info created by Edward S. Curtis, restored and uploaded by W.carter, nominated by Yann
Support 1906 picture of high quality. I like the symbolism here. -- Yann (talk) 12:20, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 12:29, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition Cmao20 (talk) 12:54, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The picture has noticeable stains, scratches, and discoloration as a result of aging and inadequate preservation. The restoration attempts are only partially effective, resulting in a lack of dynamic range and a loss of information in the shadows and highlights. It is challenging to see finer details in contemporary photography due to the image's softness and lack of sharpness. Wolverine XI 18:17, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolverine XI: Please take into account that it is a 118-year old picture. The quality can't be compared to recent ones, or even to pictures from the second part of 20th century. Yann (talk) 20:13, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Searching for the best photographs on the website is the main goal of FPC. This image is out of date, and rather than wallowing in the past, we ought to work toward achieving higher and better quality photographs—even if it means removing images from the earlier 1900s. In short, we are moving forward, not backwards. Wolverine XI 23:08, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Wolverine XI: Sorry, but you are completely wrong here. Nothing is out of date, and certainly not old artistic photographs. You better study a bit more of photography before making such judgement. Yann (talk) 23:18, 14 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I know more about photography than you can possibly imagine. You have not experienced what I have, you are not me, and you have not lived my life. And may I inquire, by which authority do you evaluate my photographic expertise? You make a lot of nasty remarks in your response, and to make matters worse, I just got back. The next time you disagree with someone, avoid targeting their personhood to further your point of view. I don't need your advice or instruction for that matter, thank you! Wolverine XI 06:14, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support If the criticism isn't really of the quality of the restoration but of the photo as "out of date," that makes no sense as an appraisal of quality and importance of any artwork. Would you say that about Bach? Michelangelo? The sculptors in ancient Egypt, China and Greece? The architects of the pyramids and the Sphinx? I wouldn't! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:18, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're not getting what I'm saying; I made a very good case for my opposition above, and you still don't get it. Wolverine XI 06:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

No, I'm sorry, I don't get it. Please feel free to rephrase it if you like, and I'll definitely consider it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:13, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Are you implying that what I put in my vote was unclear? "Out of date" refers to the quality being too poor to qualify for FP. Don't consider my reply to Yann, but the reason for my opposition. I hope that makes everything clear. Wolverine XI 09:22, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't implying anything, just agreeing with you that I must not have understood something about the case you're making and asking for a clarification. So in terms of the photo being too poor-quality, do you mean the photo in comparison to other photos of its time and/or the quality of the restoration? I'll look at it again, but I'm interested to understand your point of view better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:43, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:44, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Important historical photograph in good quality for its time and very good restoration. --Aristeas (talk) 10:53, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:31, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Yann and Ikan. Quality is never "Out of Date!" --Ooligan (talk) 17:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for nominating this Yann. This version is already an FP on en-Wiki, in case people don't know. What I love about this photo is the simple and elegant composition and its timeless subject. Four young women are up on a high point looking at dancers (who were predominantly male at that time) performing in the square below. It's not far-fetched to imagining them joking, teasing and making comments about the guys below, same as young people do today, and always have done. --Cart (talk) 14:23, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:05, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1900-1909

File:N°2 HAÏK.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2024 at 15:03:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Mus52 - uploaded by Mus52 - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 15:03, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question What is different about it and what additional things does this nomination provide compared to this other one? --Wilfredor (talk) 15:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Wilfredor, the difference is that in this one, we can see the entire Haik (the white cloth) instead of only half of it as shown in the picture you mentioned. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMO nice, and although the highlights are technically blown, for me it's okay because this is what white clothing in bright sunlight would look like to the eye. Better composition than the existing FP Cmao20 (talk) 15:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't agree that this subject is worthy of a second FP. It is too similar. People might think that that the jewellery being worn is part the the haik, but it is not. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp the image can also be used to showcase the accessory worn on the head called Khit er rouh. Best regards. Riad Salih (talk) 19:55, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too similar to the other one. --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The brightness and the half body portrait make this actually more interesting than previous one. The hands and the hand jewellery are also interesting parts of the composition. --Thi (talk) 08:55, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The right side is overexposed --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 12:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Трифонов Андрей It's natural, isn't it? Since the sun's light comes from that side at that time. Riad Salih (talk) 14:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overexposed, and I like better the current FP. Yann (talk) 15:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Riad Salih (talk) 15:37, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Corniglia dal Sentiero Azzurro2.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2024 at 13:18:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Liguria
Info: village of Corniglia seen from the Azure Trail, Cinque Terre National Park; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:18, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Good composition but the light is a little bit dull/hazy. I think this view could be FP at a different time of day. Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fall Of Baghdad (Diez Albums).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2024 at 22:13:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Historical
Info created by unknown 14th century artist, uploaded by पाटलिपुत्र, nominated by Yann
Support High quality reproduction of a 14th-century representation of the Siege of Baghdad (1258). -- Yann (talk) 22:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:56, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:25, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Трифонов Андрей (talk) 14:36, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 17:20, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent reproduction of a valuable depiction of a sad event that was one of the turning points in history. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high resolution and good quality for a 7 century old document -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 04:46, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 06:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 09:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:M Santos-Dumont Aéronaute (photographie (...)Atelier Nadar (btv1b53220531z)-restored.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2024 at 00:05:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1850-1899
Info created by Gaspard-Félix Tournachon - uploaded by Stv26 - restored/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 00:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 00:05, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 00:34, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I prefer the Wilfredo's restoration, given that it preserves the original light sepia tone (maybe too much contrast applied?) and has less grain (or it's less visible) in the darker areas. ★ 00:42, 15 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm in the middle. This one has more contrast, but that one eliminated or greatly lessened dots, scratches and other surface damage, but of course they're less visible with less contrast. Might it be possible to combine the strengths of both restorations? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This is a job for Adam the Restorer! ★ 02:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer, where possible, to help other restorers rather than take over. Ezarate, do you have Discord, perchance? Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:14, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
yes, I have Discord @Adam Cuerden: thanks!!! Ezarateesteban 11:56, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Any conclusion? ★ 12:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still more surface damage than I prefer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I made a new version, based on Wilfredor's version, but with more contrast: File:Alberto Santos-Dumont by Nadar.jpg. Yann (talk) 15:42, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann: Great! Please, nominate it separately. ★ 22:21, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:15, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:31, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Wilfredor's version[edit]

Support I prefer this Wil's alt. ★ 11:48, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 10:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Desert elephant (Loxodonta africana) spraying sand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2024 at 09:32:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Elephantidae (Elephants)
Info The desert elephant sprays sand on her back and head to keep cool while standing out in the sun guarding her baby. She has just placed a branch over the baby to protect it from the sun. I can't decide whether to crop the image or not... All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:32, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would create an extracted image of original that is cropped 25% tighter all around. --GRDN711 (talk) 18:34, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks; happy to oblige. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:42, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:05, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fantastic action of a wild animal in its natural environment, excellent view point -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:33, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:53, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:16, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 17:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 01:33, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 16:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Elephantidae (Elephants)

File:Lucha entre clanes de la tribu Mundari, Terekeka, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-29, DD 197.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2024 at 18:35:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual_sports
Info Nuba wrestling of different clans of the Mundari tribe, Terekeka, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is this nuba wrestling? Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, I updated the description Poco a poco (talk) 22:28, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Impressive --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:28, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blue, black and red clothes, skins covered with a film of sand, muscles, bracelets, landscape -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 13:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:33, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This reminds me of Chinua Achebe's novels, Things Fall Apart Riad Salih (talk) 15:40, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:13, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 01:03, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 05:53, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 12:50, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Jakubhal 19:09, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:49, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:09, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:09, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:10, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Cape Town (ZA), Wale Street -- 2024 -- 3536.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2024 at 17:45:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 17:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 17:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Attractive composition and high quality. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:03, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 04:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well balanced composition and popping up content. La Vie en rose :-) Basile Morin (talk) 08:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support very cool composition. Tomer T (talk) 08:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:42, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:52, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! ★ 13:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:33, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:43, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 18:58, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:09, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Prussian Creek Chain Bay, Kosciuszko Road, NSW.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 07:59:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Australia
Info created and uploaded by Thennike - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 07:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm fully aware that this might seem like "any other road", but this is from a rather unusual perspective and the landscapes are rare and atypical for Australia. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "Not a fan of the compo and salience". Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is a quality image, but I don't think it is outstanding. --Thi (talk) 10:30, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe the landscapes are unusual for Australia, but the foreground of yellow lines and squiggly asphalt that dominates this viewer's attention is ugly, and the landscape, once my eyes notice it, is nothing unusual-looking in general. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The image quality is certainly there. But could you tell me more about what is unusual/outstanding about these landscapes? Cmao20 (talk) 19:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Note The image has a black wedge upper right, probably from some level adjustment. --Cart (talk) 21:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, there's no chance of this nomination succeeding: I withdraw my nomination. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Le chameau et la grande dune (cropped).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2024 at 18:20:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Algeria
Info created by Eagleyes* - uploaded by Eagleyes* - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too grainy; extreme color contrast. --SHB2000 (talk) 21:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Look satured --Wilfredor (talk) 23:28, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Riad Salih (talk) 03:53, 24 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

File:St Vincent church in Soppe-le-Bas (1).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2024 at 09:48:45 (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) 09:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 09:48, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support All picture is in shadow, but is a nice church in sunset Ezarateesteban 18:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 22:26, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Very decent photo but not an extraordinary architecture, in my view. Two trees in front of the building are competing with the subject by hiding the main facade. I find the gate on the left distracting and the irregular flows of black asphalt on the road too dominant as part of the composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with Basile about the black asphalt streaks. Tournasol7, would you consider cropping out most of the road for an alternate? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you have any suggestions for crop? Tournasol7 (talk) 16:23, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll mark a suggested crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:57, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It would definitely be better with a tighter crop, but I fear that even so it would still fall into the 'strong QI' category for me, not FP. A good photo with a nice mood but just not enough wow for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 15:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:34, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Área de Proteção Ambiental Quilombos do Médio Ribeira Thomas-Fuhrmann (16) (cropped).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2024 at 13:40:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Phallaceae
Info Clathrus chrysomycelinus in the Quilombos do Médio Ribeira Environmental Protection Area, São Paulo state, Brazil. It is a species of fungus in the stinkhorn family, found in South America. Created and initially uploaded by Snowmanstudios - cropped and nominated by ★ -- ★ 13:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I cropped it just because the foreground was a bit distracting and the original crop in general a bit unbalanced. Picturesque fungus. -- ★ 13:40, 16 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is the fungus supposed to be grey or white? The whole photo seems very underexposed. BigDom (talk) 07:31, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Agree, it needs more brightness Poco a poco (talk) 08:47, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Brightness added. ★ 09:04, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Interesting fungus --Poco a poco (talk) 21:04, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting and very strange topic --Wilfredor (talk) 00:58, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Poco². --SHB2000 (talk) 06:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:34, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@ArionStar thanks for nominating my image, cropping the image this way is much better, yes! thank you. Snowmanstudios (talk) 14:13, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:24, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:40, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice. Can halos be removed from 'top' edge please @Snowmanstudios: . Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:30, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Halos not removed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per others. I think this is quite small. Adding information about the size of the fungus would increase the already substantial educational value of this photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:08, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:16, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I request to change the meaningless file name. It should be related to what is shown in the image, i.e. Clathrus chrysomycelinus --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:50, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should do it Wilfredor (talk) 02:07, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:25, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Großer Blaupfeil.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2024 at 15:51:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Libellulidae (Chasers, Skimmers, Darters and others)
Info Sven Damerow at his best, more than 45 megapixels of sharp focus-stacked dragonfly. There may be some minor stacking errors but so far I have only found one and it is barely noticeable at all. created by Sven Damerow - uploaded by Sven Damerow - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 22:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 22:58, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high level of detail and nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 05:50, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! --LexKurochkin (talk) 09:05, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 13:23, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 19:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support I'm pretty sure that's the greatest dragonfly picture I've ever seen! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the vote. This is pretty close but I can see a couple more stacking errors in that one particularly round the head. So I think this one wins. Cmao20 (talk) 00:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Thi (talk) 09:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful. – Aristeas (talk) 19:02, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 05:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:35, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --BigDom (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:20, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Libellulidae (Chasers, Skimmers, Darters and others)

File:Souamaâ, Tizi Ouzou, Grande Kabylie, Algeria.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2024 at 16:06:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Algeria
Info created by Rabah Boualia - uploaded by Rabah Boualia - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 16:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I like this composition but I think the colours are oversaturated and the blown highlights in the clouds are quite disturbing this time. I appreciate the work you are doing to find possible FPs from Algeria though. Cmao20 (talk) 16:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you,@Cmao20 for your feedback. I really appreciate it. Riad Salih (talk) 16:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this has FP potential for sure. If there is a RAW file, it might be possible to redevelop it to the acceptable technical level. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Cosmonaut Unfortunately, the user is no longer active. I tried to make some adjustments to the image by reducing the saturation based on the reviews from @SHB2000 and @Cmao20 regarding the lighting. Riad Salih (talk) 21:10, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversaturated colors. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:50, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Riad Salih (talk) 19:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sebkha D'Oran.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2024 at 14:57:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Algeria
Info created by Terki Hassaine Samir - uploaded by Terki Hassaine Samir - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 14:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 14:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question How likely is it that there would be a golden hour at 9am in that region? --Wilfredor (talk) 15:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi @Wilfredor The light of the sunrise creates this effect by adjusting the white balance on the camera. This method is called the Chinese ink style in photography, and it's challenging to combine all the elements to achieve this result. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 15:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Is 9am sunrise? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:55, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp The answer is quite obvious, isn't it? Riad Salih (talk) 19:02, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please respect the question. Sunrise was at about 8 o'clock (as far as I can work out) so my question was to whether the colours are natural or enhanced in post-processing. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp Natural colors. RAW is also available if you want. This place is called Sebkha. Regards Riad Salih (talk) 12:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support JukoFF (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:58, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:20, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful photograph. -- Abzeronow (talk) 16:42, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 19:11, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for take the time to answer --Wilfredor (talk) 14:39, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:16, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:26, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meiræ 20:17, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Guaita Fortress - San Marino - 2024 02 13 - GT 01 ver2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2024 at 17:50:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#San_Marino
Info This panorama of the San Marino (City) is the result of the fusion of 60 photographs. Above you can see the Guaita Fortress and its famous feather. The whole panorama is breathtaking even if the background is slightly foggy: During the winters, especially in the months of February and March, it is possible to see advection fogs on the Adriatic Sea, which tend to invade the mainland for several kilometers from the coast. This phenomenon indicates the imminent arrival of spring. Created, uploaded and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:25, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:56, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:03, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 22:29, 17 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It does not work for me, the colours are too dull probably due to the harsh light when the sun is near it's zenith. PierreSelim (talk) 08:05, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:36, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:41, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:26, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 19:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 21:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose midday light conditions. -- Ivar (talk) 09:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great resolution. --Aristeas (talk) 09:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:19, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:43, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Harsh light but mitigated by amazing resolution and detail and great motif Cmao20 (talk) 15:27, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 08:55, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:09, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#San_Marino

File:Maisons à Bougival, automne, par Camille Pissarro, Getty Museum, edited.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2024 at 20:12:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Exteriors#Landscapes
Info Camille Pissarro, Houses at Bougival, 1870 - uploaded by Yann - nominated by --Thi
Support --Thi (talk) 20:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Photographly. ★ 23:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question This look pretty accurate, but is it is right for us to add light and contrast to an image like this? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Yann, please comment on this, and thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:19, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Compare with other copies, i.e. [18]. Yann (talk) 07:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Can you not answer the question? I'm not saying the result is bad, I'm asking whether Wikipedia/Commons should be fiddling around with other's images. Why not find an accurate reproduction in the first place? Unless Yann is looking at the original, his edits are just guess-work. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I probably did see the original at the Getty Museum, but it's long enough ago that I couldn't say exactly how bright and contrasty it is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:38, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wilfredor (talk) 22:01, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 10:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:43, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:12, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Landscapes

File:Jacaré do pantanal.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2024 at 12:59:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Alligatoridae (Alligators and Caimans)
Info Yacare caiman (Caiman yacare) during feeding, Pantanal Matogrossense National Park, Brazil. Located on the border of the states of Mato Grosso and Mato Grosso do Sul, the park has an area of 135,606 hectares (335,090 acres). It is in the Pantanal biome. Created and uploaded by Jairmoreirafotografia - nominated by ★ -- ★ 12:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not very high resolution but I think there're strong mitigating reasons here… (BTW, it reminds me of Snowmanstudios' works). -- ★ 12:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Tilted? -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:55, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Maybe, but still FP. ★ 16:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not the previous version before this correction of the tilt made at 20:02 -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:30, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It is a nice shot, but it is quite tilted, quite small and has oversaturated colours. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:25, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I admit I was a bit hesitant to give this picture an upvote, fearing someone might comment about a "Brazilian friends group". However, I decided to cast those fears aside because, frankly, the photo is outstanding. I believe the size is perfectly appropriate given the rarity of images of this style and from this region. The composition truly deserves recognition. As for the colors, could they be considered too saturated? Personally, I don’t think so. To me, they are simply the reflection of a diverse and rich nature. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:04, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! --Yann (talk) 22:17, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Wilfredor: did you use Topaz to upscale it? --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:57, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I "rollbacked" it. To add sharpness to the photos I do an upscaling with Topaz and then a downsize to return it to its original size, I just forgot the last stage, I already returned it to its original size, thanks for letting me know Wilfredor (talk) 00:03, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent to me - look at that eye! The photographer hasn't contributed since 2017, so we can't expect them to address the degree of saturation or tilt, but I'd be happy to see an alt if anyone would like to make one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:02, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose reso is quite low -- Ivar (talk) 09:09, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:21, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 10:45, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:10, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Oversaturated colors and low resolution, only 2,244 × 1,496 pixels -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Charles, it's obviously an impressive capture but it's only 3 megapixels and seems likely to be downsampled. Cmao20 (talk) 15:28, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles Poco a poco (talk) 22:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:53, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:55, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family : Alligatoridae (Alligators and Caimans)

File:Firefighter outside of Bolé Ethiopian restaurant May 2020.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2024 at 14:37:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People_at_work
Info A firefighter stands outside of the smoldering Ethiopian restaurant Bolé Express in St. Paul, Minnesota on May 28, 2020. Created by Hungryogrephotos - uploaded and nominated by Gobonobo -- gobonobo ⁺ ^c 14:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The photo was taken in right place and right time, firefighter's face shows interesting emotions, but the image has multiple problems. Composition is the most severe IMO, including cut off feet of the firefighter, partly cut off police officer, cut off part of firefighting car, looks like that the crop was rather random. The verticals are not vertical. The sky is blown out. Midtones are rather noisy. --LexKurochkin (talk) 18:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I really like the expression on the firefighter's face, but per above, the image is clearly tilted even in thumbnail size and the crop on the right is kind of messy. There is potential here though. Cmao20 (talk) 20:42, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Cmao20: I'd be interested in working on composition if there is potential. Cropping and rotation would be fairly simple, but I have no experience dealing with noisy midtones or blown out skies. gobonobo ⁺ ^c 22:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sadly there's not much you can do about the problems LexKurochkin mentions unless you have access to the RAW file. There isn't any point trying to recover detail in the highlights when it's just not there. Cropping and rotation would at the very least improve this image considerably and make it much more useful for visitors to Commons. Cmao20 (talk) 22:29, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination. I'll take some time to see if I can improve the image. Thank you for the feedback. gobonobo ⁺ ^c 16:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ganado, Imehejek, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-21, DD 10.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2024 at 18:51:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
Info Cattle herd going through a street before sunset in Imehejek, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:51, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing composition!, congrats Diego I love very much your work. Maybe some noise because oversharpening?, but FP for sure to me --Wilfredor (talk) 19:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Denoised, thank you for your feedback, Wilfredo :) Poco a poco (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 19:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much dust covering the background. JukoFF (talk) 21:47, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely, that's IMHO what makes this shot, together with the golden hour, so interesting. Poco a poco (talk) 22:32, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

JukoFF: would you reconsider your vote? --Poco a poco (talk) 22:18, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Why, I'm always consistent in my decisions) Yes and it's nice for you to get so many positive votes! JukoFF (talk) 22:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Well, ok, as you wish, I felt that I had to double check --Poco a poco (talk) 11:26, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But, two of your votes against in my nominations, after my response. Be a man!!! JukoFF (talk) 22:32, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

You're accusing me of revenge votes? stop the bullshit! I've 11 oppose votes in FPC noms right now, two are in FPC you nominated, my god. What can I do if they are not convincing? And I'm not alone there. This is of no relevance here. If you want me to elaborate my votes, I can do it, if you ask me there to do so. Poco a poco (talk) 23:17, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The fact remains. After my negative vote. Your two negative votes on my nominations, in the span of 2 minutes :) We should be above personal grudges, that's not why we are here, think about it!!! JukoFF (talk) 23:56, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Utterly ridiculous accusation. Poco cast four other oppose votes on other nominations within the same 15-minute span as the two negative votes on your nominations. (One of them is my nomination.) Is he apparently feuding with all these people too as well as you? No evidence of 'personal grudges' here at all, timestamps clearly indicate someone just going through the list of current nominations and reviewing them objectively (he cast two support votes too). I think an apology is owed for the false accusation and the passive-aggressive tone. Cmao20 (talk) 01:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Cmao20 that you are not mad at me for opposing any of your noms and for your accurate response here. For the record, the statement "The fact remains. After my negative vote. Your two negative votes on my nominations, in the span of 2 minutes :) " is misleading. I opposed those 2 nominations 4 days and a half after JukoFF opposed here. So, nobody can speak here about an overreaction after getting pissed off or something like that --Poco a poco (talk) 12:26, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Strange oppose. The dust is essential for the composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per Wilfredor. Yann (talk) 22:15, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:49, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent and different to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:53, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:12, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:54, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:24, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:13, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 12:49, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 18:17, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support One of the best FP candidates in my opinion. Great mood, nice light, mystical dust and natural environment -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 04:47, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:38, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning photo, everything has been said really Cmao20 (talk) 15:30, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:34, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 17:21, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great mood thanks to the light and the dust in the background. – Aristeas (talk) 18:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:50, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much prefer this to the river version, great shot. BigDom (talk) 13:57, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:33, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)

File:Kruger National Park (ZA), Elefant -- 2024 -- 0649.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2024 at 16:31:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Elephantidae_(Elephants)
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 16:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 16:31, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not up there with current FPs in composition of technical excellence. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It looks like this is technically as good or better than some elephant FPs, but it's also of a type of behavior we don't appear to have an FP of (correct me if I'm wrong). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 18 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

We don't. But I much prefer this image of an elephant covering herself in sand whilst standing out in the sun protecting her sleeping baby. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Composition; especially foreground. Poor lighting from behind. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:22, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

One "oppose" should be enough. See above. ;-) --XRay 💬 13:00, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:04, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:07, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:23, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:41, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The light is not very good. From the shadows, it seems that the midday sun comes from in front. Probably not the best angle of view, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:11, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:41, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree that the light could be better but the high sharpness on the elephant makes it FP to me Cmao20 (talk) 15:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:43, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I that dustbathing? to me it looks like water. A shame that the arch of water coming out of the trunk. And yes, the ligthing isn't good, Poco a poco (talk) 19:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

It's water and sand (mud). --XRay 💬 19:55, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 18:53, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:51, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Elephantidae (Elephants)

File:Barrancas del Paraná-restored.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 18:10:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Landscapes
Info created by Giuseppe Agujari - uploaded by Isha - restored/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 18:10, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 18:10, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Nice painting but is the sharpness really there for FP? Especially at only 7.5 megapixels. Good image but I feel like we have better painting digitisations. Cmao20 (talk) 19:41, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20 -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:24, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per comments. --Thi (talk) 18:18, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 22:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Breil-Brigels in Graubünden 15-09-2022. (actm.) 24.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 05:33:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons (Graubünden)
Info Breil-Brigels, Panorama road between Waltensburg / Vuorz and Breil/Brigels, Canton of Grisons, Switzerland. Carved out passage.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:33, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 15:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:37, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The other side of Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Breil-Brigels in Graubünden. 23-09-2022. (actm.) 02.jpg with a more appealing vanishing point. But still not a truck track :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Do we really need a second FP? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:22, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Major differences in my opinion: 1) format horizontal vs vertical, 2) color of the road, sunny vs shadowy, 3) angle of view of the rock, 4) taken at different moments of the day, i.e. morning vs afternoon. In my opinion, it would comply with the set rule number 4 "A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints" -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:11, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:08, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:18, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons (Graubünden)

File:Oudtshoorn (ZA), Straußenfarm "La Plume", Afrikanischer Strauß -- 2024 -- 2625.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2024 at 17:22:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Struthionidae_(Ostriches)
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 17:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 17:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 20:00, 25 March 2024 (UTC) Per above. ★ 12:28, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sorry. I really like the idea here and there is a lot this photo does well but I don't think the ostrich is fully sharp, and this combines with the visible fence in the background to just push this into oppose territory for me. Cmao20 (talk) 20:44, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not in focus, but the composition wouldn't work if it was. Must be better opportunities on an ostrich farm. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination With so many convincing arguments, it makes more sense for me to withdraw the nomination. Thank you! --XRay 💬 05:10, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bloemknoppen van een gewone dotterbloem (Caltha palustris subsp. palustris). 17-03-2024. (d.j.b.).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2024 at 05:33:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Ranunculaceae
Info Flower buds in development of a Caltha palustris hanging above a ditch. Focus stack of 20 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:33, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:06, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Трифонов Андрей (talk) 14:38, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 16:29, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 16:35, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing background and distracting yellow shape. The right border is gray and a bit awkward. Quality image but not up to FP for a somewhat easy subject, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. FYI: The background is the water in the ditch where the plant is overhanging. The yellow spot is a flower of the same plant that hangs a little further over the ditch. The right side is shaded by another plant.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the explanation. Shade over the water seems unlikely, so probably the side of a blurred plant in the foreground? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 08:29, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As Basile and there are unhelpful bright highlights. It is not very sharp. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry but that big yellow blob in the background is just too distracting for me. The image quality is good but the background is somewhere short of outstanding Cmao20 (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I concur with Cmao20 Poco a poco (talk) 19:43, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is definitely a high-quality image of the buds, so it is very much a QI, but I agree that the yellow blob makes it a sub-optimal composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:08, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support appraising pro and contra. – Aristeas (talk) 18:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 11:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Kunst-Raststätte Illertal-Ost 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2024 at 09:43:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors/Germany#Baden-Württemberg
Info The only art rest area in Germany was designed by the Austrian architect Herbert Maierhofer. The design costs amounted to almost a quarter of the total construction costs. The curved outer walls were made of expanded clay blocks with integrated thermal insulation made of rigid polystyrene foam. The three towers were each manufactured as a complete component in plastic and transported and assembled by helicopter; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:43, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Funky subject and good photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too busy, in my opinion. Harsh light with black shadows at the lower right corner. Fun architecture but not breathtaking. Distracting industrial lamp post and red umbrellas. The deer sculpture in the center is a bit simple and badly lit. Overall cluttered composition, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:04, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:18, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:32, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too many distracting elements. Perhaps a drone picture would capture the architecture in a best way. --Thi (talk) 09:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree, that lamp in the foreground on the right kills the composition Poco a poco (talk) 09:21, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Ikan. --MZaplotnik^(talk) 11:05, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:10, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mosque of Algiers Golden dome.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2024 at 15:21:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Domes
Info created by Abdellah zou - uploaded by Abdellah zou - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 15:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 15:21, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition and oversaturated colors, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:58, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversaturated colors. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:07, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Riad Salih (talk) 15:28, 27 March 2024 (UTC).[reply]

File:Malcolm X NYWTS 2a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2024 at 17:00:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1960-1969
Info created by Ed Ford, uploaded by Durova, nominated by Yann
Support Good historical picture of a notable personality. FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 17:00, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Famous photo, deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:04, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 08:44, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 11:48, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support There is a lack of sharpness, noise and the photo is overexposed, and it is also not in color. Of course, these criticisms do not apply to a photo from 60 years ago. --Wilfredor (talk) 12:50, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meiræ 20:12, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:19, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical/People#1960-1969

File:Parque Nacional Marinho dos Abrolhos - Ronaldo Eduardo Diláscio (2).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2024 at 13:06:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Sulidae (Boobies and Gannets)
Info Masked booby (Sula dactylatra) at Abrolhos Marine National Park, Brazil. It is a national park that was established in 1983 covering most of the Abrolhos Archipelago area in the Brazilian state of Bahia. Created and uploaded by Ronaldo Dilascio - nominated by ★ -- ★ 13:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- ★ 13:06, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technical quality is well down on what should have been possible with the camera. Nothing is sharp and DoF is not great. Light is not on the head. Crop has too much at the sides and not enough at the bottom. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:52, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles, sorry - good composition although more space at the bottom would be preferable, but bird is not sharp and lots of blue and purple CA. I see what you were thinking but ultimately this photo could have been so much better. Cmao20 (talk) 23:09, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the reviews. ★ 23:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Niagara River at Niagara Glen.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2024 at 23:53:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Ontario
Info: autumn colours at Niagara Gorge; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:53, 19 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 04:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty and peaceful. I had no idea there was such a rural part of the Niagara River. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:10, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but the composition is not so exciting, in my view. Too much water, unspectacular sky, insignificant foreground. Vegetation is okay, slightly colorful, but not extremely special. Overall no wow, because something like a ship, an animal or an island is missing -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:20, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I would have liked more sky, more panoramic crop, less foreground water, no rock and a brighter day. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:16, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I like the colours and the mood but the composition leaves something to be desired for me. I think it'd be better if the rock was placed at a third, rather than just awkwardly off at the edge of the frame. Cmao20 (talk) 15:35, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Basile Poco a poco (talk) 22:44, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:33, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 12:49, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:59, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice fall colors but the composition is a bit sterile, with the water not really doing much. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:07, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 11:09, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Parc national de la Jacques-Cartier, Quebec, Canada 22.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2024 at 01:08:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Québec
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 01:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 03:56, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 11:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would like more sky and 3x2 or something more panoramic. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:15, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
What do you think about this one ? Wilfredor (talk) 12:26, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Still too much foreground for my taste. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:08, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:36, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good foreground. – Aristeas (talk) 19:00, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, thanks to having a strong tripod I was able to place it in the middle of the river. Wilfredor (talk) 20:18, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:59, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 11:10, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Pt18-176 Strandsediment.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2024 at 10:41:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Others
Info created and uploaded by Lusi Lindwurm, nominated by Yann
Info Beach sediment forming small braided rivers in the surf zone with dark minerals differentiated by their specific weight, Northern Algarve, Portugal.
Support -- Yann (talk) 10:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:54, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 10:58, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought it was a cave painting --Wilfredor (talk) 12:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Beautiful at full page, but I wish it were somewhat sharper, and I also wish we had some sense of scale. Did I miss something that indicates scale? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:37, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Corner sharpness is not so good but overall scientifically interesting enough for FP and high resolution Cmao20 (talk) 16:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:05, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 15:25, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Meiræ 20:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. – Aristeas (talk) 16:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ǃ --Terragio67 (talk) 22:05, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Simocephalus3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2024 at 07:20:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Simocephalus sp. are 3-4 mm in length, round animals that are covered in a bivalve carapace

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Daphniidae
Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 07:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Janeklass (talk) 07:20, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Please add a description above. Yann (talk) 10:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If this photos shows some Simocephalus species, it belongs to the Daphniidae family, right? Then please use Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Daphniidae as gallery link (just as I have corrected this above) – and also for any other photos of any Daphniidae. Thank you! – Aristeas (talk) 10:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Also, please correct the red-linked categorization. We need blue links. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:40, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now on this basis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:03, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, but I don't understand what you mean by red and blue links... Janeklass (talk) 03:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Look at the file page. At the bottom, there is a red link. It means if you click on this link, the page does not exist. Per COM:I you have to handle this work before nominating a candidate. See COM:CAT -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:36, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Now the link has been fixed Janeklass (talk) 15:19, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank you. It's a great photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:51, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support but please do try to get the gallery right so as to save others work in fixing your nomination. Regardless, the photo is superb. Cmao20 (talk) 16:45, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I will try to follow it up in the future Janeklass (talk) 17:27, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! – Aristeas (talk) 16:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 19:07, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 23:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meiræ 20:11, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:41, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:23, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:00, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 14:25, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Daphniidae

File:WLE - 2022 - Parque nacional de Ordesa y Monte Perdido - 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2024 at 15:51:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain#Aragon
Info The leading lines, the sense of movement in the water, the mist and the autumn colours all make this a strong candidate to me. created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:51, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The trees are all leaning out, the technical quality is so-so and I wonder why a square crop was chosen. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:54, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support: perspective looks fine to me, but the square crop is odd indeed. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:17, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I actually really like the square crop, it places the blurry water in the corner so that it leads the eye gently through the frame. But I do take Charles’s criticisms about the technical quality. Still FP to me but let’s see how the votes go. Cmao20 (talk) 00:30, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 21:24, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find the leaning trees most disturbing.--Ermell (talk) 09:08, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Spectacular to me. The way the trees are shown seems like a minor issue in context to this viewer. It's just a shame User:Moahim has no contributions since last year and is unlikely to see any of this discussion and choose how to address it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I think he is one of these users who tends to show up when Wiki Loves Earth is happening, but doesn't really log in otherwise. Totally reasonable of course. Cmao20 (talk) 00:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Of course, on an all-volunteer site! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:20, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Dramatic. – Aristeas (talk) 19:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Ermell Poco a poco (talk) 09:19, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:52, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree with Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:55, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:08, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:15, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Imperial Hall, Residenz Munich, Germany.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2024 at 13:34:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info created by -- Wilfredor (talk) 13:34, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:39, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:19, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:32, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 19:01, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:47, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unbalanced compo. Too much of the floor, and in relation too few of the ceiling -- at least the painting should not have been cut. --A.Savin 13:43, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the equal parts of the ceiling and the floor --Llez (talk) 10:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:25, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:14, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Macropus rufogriseus with joey in pouch leaning down.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2024 at 16:56:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Macropodidae (Macropods)
Info created by grendel|khan - uploaded by grendel|khan - nominated by Grendelkhan -- grendel|khan 16:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- grendel|khan 16:56, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose 2017 quality definition and processing. Camera has limited quality you could have achieved. Harsh light. PoV too high. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles + zoo photo. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:39, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I agree with the above comments but keep trying, this isn't that far from FP! I think the main problems are that the sharpness at full size is not as good as our best wildlife photos and that the light is quite harsh. But this image is a solid QI and useful for the project. I wonder whether the sharpness could be improved if you go back to the RAW file and tone down the in-camera noise reduction. Cmao20 (talk) 22:03, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Like others said, not quite, but it's a good effort and deserves the QI label. I'd like to encourage you to keep on trying for FPs of animals. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for the encouragement; I'll try to focus on animal pictures taken outside of zoos, pending QI approval as a sort of first-pass filter. grendel|khan 20:46, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:17, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eurasian sparrowhawk (Accipiter nisus nisus) male.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2024 at 13:07:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Accipiter
Info A lunchtime visitor to our garden, enjoying his pigeon. Two current FPs, one feeding. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:07, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Superb quality, and the contextualised surroundings, while not very nice, make this image interesting and informative. Cmao20 (talk) 15:36, 20 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is really great to have an eye like yours to watch, capture, and bring these wild action scenes here. Could you expand a bit the description on the file page, so that we understand better what's happening? -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 09:06, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:11, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Трифонов Андрей (talk) 12:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could someone explain to me what happened here please? --Wilfredor (talk) 13:23, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sparrowhawk grabbed a pigeon and brought it to ground, killing it and eating it in front of our kitchen window. Photo taken though a closed glass door. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:53, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Please, could you add date and time of the shoot in the exif. Thanks Wilfredor (talk) 15:02, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I forgot to update camera clock. Shows Australian time!. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand you, I had a similar problem in Europe, there is no easy way to do this Wilfredor (talk) 23:01, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Unless of course cameras are able to connect to satellites. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:15, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support JukoFF (talk) 20:10, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent action shot. There's noise on and around the bird's tail feathers; I leave it to your discretion whether to do anything about that or leave it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:46, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, new version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:40, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Excellent shot! You do a great work in showcasing birdlife from around the world, but it's great to see a bit of an insight into your home area (Oxfordshire?). --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 09:36, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support and props to your window cleaner. BigDom (talk) 01:42, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 22:46, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:11, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent shot and great educational educational value. --Gyrostat (talk) 15:00, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm inclined to oppose due to feather arrangement. Wolverine XI 21:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The sparrowhawk or the pigeon, please. What are you meaning by arrangement? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:48, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 21:11, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Accipiter

File:Tribu Laarim, Kimotong, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-23, DD 15.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2024 at 21:21:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Standing_people
Info Kids of the Laarim tribe walking around their village in Kimotong, South Sudan. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:21, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent composition and colours. Cmao20 (talk) 22:13, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! --Yann (talk) 22:25, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 23:43, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, sensitive photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 05:06, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:09, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Question concerning personality rights - did the parents of these children sign an agreement that this image can be published? --Kritzolina (talk) 08:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the best of your South Sudan images, but the outstanding composition is what pulls me in. Wolverine XI 11:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 11:40, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 15:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 19:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice, but the missing feet are an issue. Just a few steps more... Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:30, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question - you recently cared about personality rights of children on QI. You don't see this as an issue here? Just because of the personality right warning? Kritzolina (talk) 07:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I trust the motives and ethics of this photographer. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:08, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:59, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:44, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:16, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:22, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice colors and jewelries -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 16:51, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 08:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Havelock Island, Sandy lagoon, Andaman Islands.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2024 at 11:39:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info Tropical beach in Havelock Island (Swaraj Dweep), Andaman and Nicobar Islands, Andaman Sea, Indian Ocean. All by -- Argenberg (talk) 11:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Argenberg (talk) 11:39, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely composition Cmao20 (talk) 14:13, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would prefer the tree slightly further away. It dominates the composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:57, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good and interesting. Do we already have FPs from these islands? Yann (talk) 15:28, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t see any except this one: File:Escenius midas (Midas blenny).jpg. And I have a few images more from the South Andaman Islands that I think might be good FP candidates. --Argenberg (talk) 10:34, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 16:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Definitely FP potential of a dead tree in a paradisiac white sand beach and turquoise water, but here I mostly only see the dead tree. The compo doesn't work for me, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 19:41, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good to me. Artist's choice to have the tree dominate the photo, no problem to my mind. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:56, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Artist's choice, I agree. We don't have to like it though. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:22, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, you surely don't. I agree with that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:54, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Without the dead tree it would be one of thousands beautiful and boring dream beach photos. The tree makes the photo. – Aristeas (talk) 19:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Shadow in the foreground, tight crop at the left. Also per Poco. Not the best composition, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is beautiful, and I agree with Aristeas about the dead tree --LexKurochkin (talk) 13:53, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 09:59, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support - What I really like about this photo is that the dead tree looks so much more dynamic due to all the curves than the lively beach which is just a horizon. I probably would've tried leg-zooming out and left a bit but still great. One suggestion: maybe try cropping a bit from the left (and bottom) and see if you like it better. -- KennyOMG (talk) 19:30, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 18:54, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hibiscus Rising sculpture from above. LEEDS 2023. 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2024 at 09:36:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures_outdoors
Info created by Octovision Media - uploaded by Lajmmoore - nominated by Lajmmoore -- Lajmmoore (talk) 09:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this image was uploaded to Commons as part of a paid project, see WPːGLAM/Leeds2023 -- Lajmmoore (talk) 09:36, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment this is my first FP nomination, so am learning the ropes, thank you for your time and patience Lajmmoore (talk) 09:45, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support adding support as nominator Lajmmoore (talk) 09:58, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support For your first nomination it's a very good one. Colourful and with amazing light. I wish that the top left corner didn't have that big ugly triangular shadow but there's nothing that could have been done except wait for a different time of day, which might have produced a worse result overall. Cmao20 (talk) 14:12, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Commons rules say you can’t upload someone else’s work. What is the situation here Lajmmoore? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs) 15:50, 21 March 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]

They do not. You can upload someone else's work if it's in the public domain or has a suitable Creative Commons Copyleft license on it and you credit your source. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:24, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Ikan Kekek, that was my understanding of the guidance @Charlesjsharp Lajmmoore (talk) 07:01, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This tutorial must be wrong then... Ikan Kekek. It states no promotional photos. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:56, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Do you mean "By default, you can’t upload someone else’s work"? Yes, that's the default. However, doing so is allowed in cases like the ones I outline, and for example, loads and loads of properly licensed photos have been uploaded from sites like Flickr. If you think this photo is purely promotional, I'm not sure why, but again, that's a default for images that are purely promotional and lack educational value. Look at "However, there are some exceptions" on that page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not saying the artwork doesn't have artistic value but the nominator made it clear that this image was uploaded to Commons as part of a paid project. Octoviison media is not the photographer, just a production company employed by Leeds to promote the city. We have no information on copyright though I guess the photographer assigned his rights to the production company. Don't we need to know who took the photo? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hello @Charlesjsharp - Octovision Media is a drone photographer based in Hull, who assigned their images to Leeds 2023 (Leeds Culture Trust) and gave permission for this image and a couple of others to be released under an open license. They are not a "production company employed by Leeds to promote the city". Secondly, again, I looked carefully at the guidelines here and I could not see where it precludes nominations from paid projects, indeed there are examples from other paid projects like this that have already been Featured on Commons. This one was voted for with support by a number of people, including yourself. Lajmmoore (talk) 18:57, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Not so. Octovision Media is a corporate entity, not a photographer. It employs photographers/drone operators. And we can assume they were paid to take the promotional photo. The image I supported is sharing culture. Not the same as pushing the merits of Leeds as a city. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:44, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose No promotion please Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you @Charlesjsharp it's good to have open disucssion. 1) This is is a cultural project, part of a Wikimedian-in-Residence project to share Leeds' cultural heritage - like hundreds of other GLAM partnerships. 2) I don't think it matters that they were originally paid for the image, what matters for Commons is that it is now available in the public domain, which it is - this isn't precluded anywhere. If it was all the hundreds of historic photos taken in professional studios (that are now in the public domain) would be disallowed because at the time a photographer was paid for them by the sitters. Lajmmoore (talk) 07:26, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Let’s look at this in a more relaxed way. Do we have a sharp distinction between selfless contributions and promotion? I don’t think so. There is plenty of promotional material on Commons user pages as well as on file pages. Just look at all the links to personal websites, assorted photography projects, wildlife parks and reserves, etc. Some users even have their websites included in the ‘Author’ or ‘Source’ parameters on Commons, even if they upload their files directly … This is all common(s) practice. Now what is worse with this photo? It does not cry “Buy x!” or “Come to y!” or “Vote for z!”. It does not even say “NN is a great photographer!”. It just documents an interesting work of art and can be used for many things. So why shouldn’t we welcome this photo? – Aristeas (talk) 12:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 16:48, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the photo; I hope the legal questions will be sorted. – Aristeas (talk) 19:04, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tempered Support: It's a cool sculpture and the ideal view of it. The only thing that tempers my support is that the areas of dirt and vegetation below are not the ideal background, which would be a more undifferentiated one such as all stones. However, it's the background that was there, and the subject is interesting enough to make the photo worth featuring, anyway, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:14, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:54, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 18:53, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:BlackEyedPeas.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2024 at 23:26:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food
Info Black-eyed peas (Vigna unguiculata subsp. unguiculata). Created and uploaded by 99of9 - nominated by ★ -- ★ 23:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This shot reminds me of my last FPs. -- ★ 23:26, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice perspective! Could do with a bit of sharpness, but this will do for me. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:40, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Light and quality very average, sorry. See COM:FPC "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject." This shot is not as good as some focus stacked images, nor very difficult, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think this is the kind of photo that would have easily passed FP ten years ago, but isn't so obviously FP now. The motif is great but the sharpness and DoF is not wonderful for an easily reproducible shot. Cmao20 (talk) 02:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's 2024, and this won't do for FP. An image is supposed to bring some type of emotion to the viewer; this image, unfortunately, fails to deliver on that front. Wolverine XI 12:58, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing light. --Thi (talk) 13:27, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination ★ 16:49, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Entombment of Christ-Caravaggio (c.1602-3).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2024 at 20:15:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Religion#Christianity
Info Caravaggio, The Entombment of Christ - uploaded by Masur - nominated by --Thi
Support --Thi (talk) 20:15, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 23:35, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:51, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Colleagues, how do we determine why one or another medieval painting might get status and another? The question is rhetorical, I have another favorite painting of this painter:) JukoFF (talk) 00:54, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Personally I will support if it is a work by a reasonably well-known artist (i.e. notable enough to make their work important) that has at least some aesthetic appeal to me and if the quality of the reproduction is good. In this case the painting has a Wikipedia article so its notability is clear. Cmao20 (talk) 00:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the answer, but I'm not sure that the presence of a Wikipedia article should influence the choice, in the case of choosing other digital images the presence of a Wikipedia article in 9 cases out of 10 plays no role at all. Why does it matter in this case? JukoFF (talk) 01:11, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I mean it's not essential. For the artist to have a WP article is probably enough for me. I think our job re. artworks on Commons FP is to build a library of high-quality digitisations of artwork that might plausibly be considered great or valuable. Cmao20 (talk) 02:27, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think our job re. artworks on Commons FP is to build a library of high-quality digitisations of artwork. I can't see the point. The version seems oversaturated. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:09, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

What is it then? For me, this is exactly for Commons is here for. But I agree about the saturation. Yann (talk) 15:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:36, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support – Aristeas (talk) 10:09, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:59, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fatima BW 2018-10-07 11-13-53.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2024 at 19:22:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Portugal
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Berthold Werner
Support -- Berthold Werner (talk) 19:22, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think the people help the photo. As a matter of fact, the "I'M NOT SARCASTIC" shirt distracts me too much from the really good compositional idea you had in terms of the architecture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 21 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Ikan. Really sorry but it would have been better at a moment with fewer people in the foreground, I get how hard that might be but it's just too distracting for me. Cmao20 (talk) 00:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support although it is clear that 2 millimeters decide ) JukoFF (talk) 01:13, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I caught a moment when there were relatively few people in the picture. But I still don't understand why humans in photos are disturbing. Especially at a place of pilgrimage that thousands of people visit every day. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Berthold Werner (talk • contribs) 11:22, 22 March 2024‎ (UTC)[reply]

Because here they distract. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:47, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. Berthold, you didn't get my point about the text on that shirt? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yes, on the one hand I would love to see this place without all the people in the foreground. On the other hand the people with their mundane clothes etc. provide an interesting contrast to the gigantic modern architecture of the foreground and the classic church in the background. So while this is not a perfect photo of the site, it is IMHO an impressive document of today’s pilgrimage and pilgrims in Fatima. – Aristeas (talk) 19:17, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 01:41, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There are pictures where people contribute to the composition but it isn't the case here and there is no much of what I'd expect in a Fatima shot here Poco a poco (talk) 09:15, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:47, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The people. Wolverine XI 21:17, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice idea but agree with others that the people distract here, also think the large letters in the foreground distract too, and it's not quite centred (although it may be the case that the monument is not quite aligned with the church in real life). BigDom (talk) 13:55, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:58, 31 March 2024 (UTC))[reply]

File:Kit Kat.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2024 at 12:22:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food
Info Kit Kats at a supermarket in Colatina, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 12:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was wowed when I looked at this because I've never seen so many Kit Kats in my life (Note: not taken at a Japanese market). -- ★ 12:22, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Do we have any possible problems with copyright in uploading pictures where the KitKat logo features so prominently? Or does the logo fail to meet the threshold of originality? Cmao20 (talk) 14:27, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know considering that there's the Kit Kat category. ★ 14:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The logo is too simple to have a copyright. Multiple public domain logos don't create a copyright. IMO the issue is the opposite: is there any ethic issue advertising this product? Yann (talk) 17:43, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

IMO, no, it's a nice composition. But besides, didn't that issue disappear from the art world when Warhol's Campbell's soup cans were accepted as art, not just commercial art? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:10, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice photo. I don't know whether it's below COM:TOO for all the relevant countries. Anyone who thinks it probably is not should feel free to start a deletion request. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:07, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 18:16, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the photo, anyway. It could be sharper but I don't think more sharpness would add that much in this case. Cmao20 (talk) 19:33, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though a descriptive filename would be nice (should be done once this nom has concluded). --SHB2000 (talk) 20:52, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just "Kit Kat" is enough for easy-search purposes, IMO as the author. ★ 21:45, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Nope, since chocolate isn't the only thing called Kit Kat, you need to specify the name of your photo a bit better. I always associate Kit Kat with the nightclub in Cabaret, since we rarely see these chocolate bars here in Sweden. We have Kexchoklad instead. ;-) --Cart (talk) 23:08, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

But both associations are sweet ;) Wilfredor (talk) 22:56, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Neither the subject nor the composition are intresting. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:28, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, the arousal of interest is subjective ;) ★ 21:39, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No symbolic meaning or relevance as a photograph, just a good picture. Felino Volador (talk) 16:32, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support If one wants a symbolic meaning, well, IMHO it has got one, and even a very ethical one: people buy and eat far too much of this and similar sweets. ;–) – Aristeas (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:35, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:40, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing light, and per COM:FPC "A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject." Sharpness is not excellent at the corners, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:22, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's just Kit Kat. Good photo but not worthy of being featured IMO. Wolverine XI 13:21, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination ★ 17:04, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Arion, you are well aware that there is still a chance for this photo to pass, right (vote count sits at 7:5)? --SHB2000 (talk) 20:57, 29 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No chance (unless all three visitors – Yann, W.carter and Wilfredor – vote in favor). ★ 00:43, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info No chance to get any more reviews, {{S}} or {{O}}, as long as the {{withdrawal}} template is displayed on this page -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:42, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Оса полист.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 01:43:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
Info created by Shapomacro - uploaded by Shapomacro - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 01:43, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JukoFF (talk) 01:43, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Oversharpened, but still good Cmao20 (talk) 02:24, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Unsure whether this is FP anymore owing to Ermell's point about bad use of the clone stamp tool, it's quite noticeable. Cmao20 (talk) 16:42, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:55, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oh hell, I don't know. This is an impressive closeup, but if a cloning tool was used on the compound eyes, I'm not really in a position to judge that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Thi (talk) 09:32, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It would be great if not so overprocessed. And I would have rotated the image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:05, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oversaturated colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:30, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree, looks overprocessed Poco a poco (talk) 09:14, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Clone stamping not good. The eyes look strange and per others.--Ermell (talk) 23:26, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 12:46, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell, the green parts of the eyes are not well done at full size, and also per my comment above -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell. Yann (talk) 15:34, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /SHB2000 (talk) 06:28, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Вакутин камень.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 01:48:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Volga Federal District
Info Vakutin stone is a geological natural monument. The 100-meter-high gray stone stands on the right bank of the Irgina River, which in this place makes a steep 180-degree loop. / created by Dendaris - uploaded by Dendaris - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 01:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JukoFF (talk) 01:48, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Vignetting? Overprocessed? ★ 02:06, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. But even if I do, it's no more than any other:) JukoFF (talk) 02:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Seems oversaturated to me. It's a bit noisy but I can forgive that as part of the compromises necessary to capture this scene. Cmao20 (talk) 02:25, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per OP and Cmao20. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:14, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose over-processed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:03, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overprocessed with weird sky, and probably artificial vignetting -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:34, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noisy, lack of perspective (looking at the sides makes me dizzy) correction Poco a poco (talk) 09:13, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too noisy. Also, poor categorization, missing coords --A.Savin 13:49, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--SHB2000 (talk) 06:28, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Machhapuchhre or Fishtail Mountain 6,993 m (22,943 ft)- IMG 5246.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 08:23:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Nepal
Info created by Bijay Chaurasia - uploaded by Bijay Chaurasia - nominated by Bijay Chaurasia -- Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 08:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 08:23, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Problems with sky top left and right. Seems oversaturated or something too. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:59, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 17:19, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't mind the blown highlights on the mountain and the clouds. It's just what they'd look like in bright sunlight Cmao20 (talk) 19:39, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It's the dark blue sky top left and the light blue top right that isn't right. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is there something about the direction in which the sunlight is shining that makes you sure it's not right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:23, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't mean to imply it had been processed badly, it's the sun and cloud mist or glare or whatever that ruins the right hand side of the image. 10:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC) Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:28, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks for the clarification, Charles (and please sign your post). It's not ruined to me but an excellent photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:06, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support ★ 20:20, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:09, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support A beautiful photo that I would have liked to have taken myself.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:31, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:47, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Famberhorst. – Aristeas (talk) 10:51, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meiræ 20:14, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:24, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 13:47, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lenzuola di seta.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2024 at 06:28:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Tuscany
Info created and uploaded by Pamela Doretti - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 06:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support This photo also won 2nd place in WLE-IT 2023. While I'm not fond of the blown-out sun, the wow takes it for me. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:28, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed. Yann (talk) 09:50, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The composition had huge potential but presumably was taken with a phone/low quality camera (no EXIF) as there is little definition, noise and CA. No idea if the original could be reworked. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:45, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose presumably not going to be reworked. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:21, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support: refined the gallery to Tuscany. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:35, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Painterly and impressive scene. Quality is OK. – Aristeas (talk) 19:29, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't think it's a phone camera. It has too much detail at full size for that. There's noise but I think the wow of the subject is enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 19:36, 22 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 00:31, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting webs, unfortunately Overprocessed image without metadata (like 1, 2, 3, 4, 5... by the same author). Unrealistic landscape in my view, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:02, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ...agree and too much noise, tilted. Poco a poco (talk) 09:10, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support The noise is not too disturbing. A bit like all the Instagram eyecatchers but not so bad.--Ermell (talk) 23:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support An unusual scene, we shouldn't criticize the noise and other aspects for limited sensors, because it would basically be using the fallacy of why the photographer didn't take the photo with another camera, are we evaluating cameras or photographs? --Wilfredor (talk) 00:34, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:38, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:41, 24 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Meiræ 20:15, 25 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:26, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 13:47, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Écomusée d’Alsace 16.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2024 at 12:50:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 12:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice motif Cmao20 (talk) 14:10, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:11, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support ★ 16:13, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 20:50, 26 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting architectural element -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:01, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:12, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good motif. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:08, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:59, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:38, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 20:21, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:48, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others --Terragio67 (talk) 21:54, 27 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:33, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:14, 28 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:37, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cmao20 (talk) 13:46, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]

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