Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/May 2020

File:Boston, as the Eagle and the Wild Goose See It.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2020 at 19:37:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical
Info created by James Wallace Black - uploaded by Da5nsy - nominated by RootlessCosmopolitain -- RootlessCosmopolitain (talk) 19:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- RootlessCosmopolitain (talk) 19:37, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Did not open yet at full size, but there is a visible black frame to be removed first. And please also fix the gallery -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:57, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done — I fixed the gallery but am unable to overwrite the original file in Commons. -- RootlessCosmopolitain (talk)

And that's a problem, sorry, half [No] not done I would say -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:43, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question On what basis are you presenting this as FP please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:07, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the basis of historical significance — it's the first documented aerial photograph and the file is remarkably high quality. -- RootlessCosmopolitain (talk)

I feel like it could use a digital restoration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Unrestored, stains and scratches visible, and the subject itself lacks wow -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info I left it unretouched because this is the original print of the image from 1859, and in my view, the somewhat antique quality of the print adds to the effect that this is a photograph of historic merit. -- RootlessCosmopolitain (talk) 03:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I understand your point of view, but it's not the point of view that wins the day at FPC. We reward excellent digital restorations and expect the restored photo to include a link to the original. You could make this argument at VIC, though; people might be more receptive to it there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Basile Morin, Olivier LPB (talk) 09:38, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan, with no prejudice against a restored version. Daniel Case (talk) 18:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Côte d'Albâtre - Roc Vaudieu.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2020 at 16:34:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Normandy
Info Alabaster coast at Roc Vaudieu, Normandy, France. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 16:34, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not enough sky for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:43, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sky is empty. It´s a view into the deep and the distance. --Milseburg (talk) 16:48, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Sorry not enough sky for me. IMO rule of thirds is not always necessary, but this is just nice to look to. --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:10, 21 April 2020 (UTC) After extra sky I change to Neutral[reply]
@Michielverbeek: I actually don't like to follow rule of thirds with an empty sky or empty water; I'd go with 1/4 or 1/5 for sky, and possibly even less for water. But I agree with the general sentiment that this picture has too little sky. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Opposeper Michielverbeek. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:25, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty and well-composed photo but IMO the light is a bit too dull for FP, sorry Milseburg. It's a solid QI though. Cmao20 (talk) 13:36, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info @Charlesjsharp, Michielverbeek, King of Hearts, and Fischer.H: I spent more sky. --Milseburg (talk) 14:03, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, but I'm not sure an artificially-added sky is appropriate here. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:02, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: You´re right. That hasn't been the best solution. Now I added a natural sky by stitching in total 4 frames. --Milseburg (talk) 16:52, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - The additional sky made the photo breathe more and added at least one more shore bird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:57, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:14, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It’s a pity that the light is a bit boring, sorry, but else it is good, the details in the foreground are nice. --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:18, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sorry, I agree with Aristeas that the light does not make this stand out enough for FP for me. Otherwise very good quality. --Domob (talk) 16:35, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Durmitor mountains (by Pudelek) 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2020 at 13:57:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Montenegro
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 13:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 13:57, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose These kinds of hilly pictures with partial shadows are often very nice (especially on a dramatic, stormy day), but here I think the shadow is too strong and covers too much of the image. Also, putting the two peaks at the left and right edge makes them compete for attention, diverting your eyes away from the middle creating an unbalanced composition. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, this is a good QI but the composition just doesn't interest me enough for FP. It's a nice landscape but there's no real tension in it to draw the eye. Cmao20 (talk) 15:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not special enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:28, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:45, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, per King, and suggest that it's time to withdraw the nomnation as further !voting is not likely to overcome six opposes against the nominator's sole support after four days. Daniel Case (talk) 17:35, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common lime during an autumn sunset, Christchurch, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2020 at 22:36:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants#Family_:_Malvaceae
Info All by me. As you can see, autumn has arrived to New Zealand. It's a lime tree (a linded) in the evening light. I like the colours and simple composition. -- Podzemnik (talk) 22:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 22:36, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. --Famberhorst (talk) 15:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:07, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:26, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:50, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:26, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:50, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:43, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 11:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Plymouth PE - Funchal 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2020 at 04:45:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 04:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 04:45, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and something different. Cmao20 (talk) 13:49, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 00:37, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no wow for me. Weird composition -- all the focus on the reflection which is nothing particularly interesting plus dried off streaks from washing the rim. Renata3 (talk) 03:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Renata3, also the POV and crop are IMHO weird. —kallerna (talk) 08:01, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good idea, funny composition and fine quality. --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:53, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 00:51, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:32, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 11:13, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Renata3 --Cvmontuy (talk) 15:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles

File:Upper Salmon River6.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Apr 2020 at 21:23:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#New Brunswick
Info: Upper Salmon River shrouded in fog, Fundy National Park, New Brunswick, Canada. All by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - lovely atmosphere. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:51, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Conditional support~~ per Ikan this is a beautiful photo and the atmosphere is enough for FP, but there is a bit of black border in the bottom left corner that needs to be cropped/cloned out. Cmao20 (talk) 13:37, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support thanks! Cmao20 (talk) 14:39, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done: border fixed, good catch, thank you, Cmao20 --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:38, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:17, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The clouds could have given it a mystic atmosphere, but I think they were a bit too thick here, and the overall is rather dull in my view. - Benh (talk) 21:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:34, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 00:48, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Per Benh. It has a nice atmosphere to me, but nothing too striking and indeed looks a bit dull unfortunately. --Domob (talk) 16:33, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bad Rappenau - Heinsheim - jüdischer Friedhof - Blick über Ostmauer bei Sonnenuntergang.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2020 at 14:37:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info created by Aristeas - uploaded by Aristeas - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 14:37, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 14:37, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Colorful in a subtle way. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:01, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Melancholy autumnal composition with nice colour contrasts between green and red/orange. Excellent use of depth of field too, blurring the background but leaving the gravestones crisply sharp. Cmao20 (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:04, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much, Andrei, for nomination and all of you for your support :–). --Aristeas (talk) 06:40, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 06:59, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:23, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:55, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:27, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:04, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:58, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well photographed and the sunset adds something -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:53, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 11:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 20:26, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:51, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:35, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great mood. Daniel Case (talk) 17:45, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:21, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Leucht Erdbeeren.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2020 at 14:44:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info created & - uploaded by Ritchyblack - nominated by Junior Jumper -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 14:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 14:44, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Fun studio shot, but why crop the reflections? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:57, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose unfortunately per Charles. I like the shot but without the full reflections it just seems strangely unsatisfying. Cmao20 (talk) 19:30, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Too frustrating not to have the full reflections. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:56, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The trick part doesn't really work for me: The light hidden inside the center strawberry is a niche idea, but it's just not strong enough to be easily recognized as an intended effect. TBH, to me it looks more like a weird glitch that was introduced in post while pushing a slider to far. --El Grafo (talk) 09:51, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info I also think that it is not a featured picture. But I have to argue that the effect has been edited. The effect is easier to see here. https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/c4/LeuchtTomate.jpg Ritchyblack (talk) 14:06, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the tomato works much better! Neat. --El Grafo (talk) 09:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Trick light creates a lot of posterization. Daniel Case (talk) 03:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:09, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nettle tree (Libythea celtis) Bulgaria.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2020 at 10:57:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info This is an unusual type of butterfly. They've got a long snout/beak/palpi. The flower is a fragrant type of mint. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:57, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:57, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual indeed; quality and sharpness are great. Cmao20 (talk) 13:50, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:41, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose imho it doesn't stand out among other FP-s of this category. --Ivar (talk) 18:00, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, here's a surprise, another oppose vote from Ivar! There is no FP of this genus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:46, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Very good to me. Can you identify the insect on the left side of the plant? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:40, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not this time. It's a small black bug!! Charlesjsharp (talk)

Support Your new Photoshop plugins do wonders. --Podzemnik (talk) 00:36, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, that's why I notified the community on the FP talk page about Topaz Denoise AI and Sharpen AI. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:58, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 06:07, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Definitely a nice picture, however, I agree with Ivar. The light is rather dull, and it would be nice if the flower was focused. —kallerna (talk) 08:00, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What camera settings do you suggest I should have used —kallerna to focus the flower? Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:56, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As we both know, it is not possible to take this frame with both the butterfly and the flower focused. IMHO it is disruptive when the flower is so obviously OOF. As I said it's a nice picture, but I think this is not your best butterfly image. —kallerna (talk) 10:55, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
BTW, found one butterfly-shot from my galleries, and the flower is not disruptively OOF (of course a completely different setting and location). However, it's a common species and the background is rather distracting - would not support that nowadays. —kallerna (talk) 11:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Happy to support delisting of your image. Settings are always a compromise. Your flower is only so-so, but your choice of 1/200 sec and F14 mean that there is zero detail around the head of the butterfly. My flower is in focus, but with little depth of focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:49, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to delist the photo. I'm here to cherish the quality of FPs - not to bolster up my ego. —kallerna (talk) 12:11, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:15, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:21, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I appreciate the fact that this is a species of which we don't have HQ images but the out of focus flower, specially on the top, is in fact disturbing. I'd even rather get rid of the top. Poco a poco (talk) 14:41, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's a possibility. Any thoughts elsewhere? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:04, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer the photo as is but would be willing to consider a different version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:36, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support I wouldn't call that dull, but soft lighting here. Although it might be a bit too even. I like it anyways. I don't care much about the OOF parts. I'd say they even makes this more 3-dimensional. I also like that the details on the wings are very nicely rendered (but I'm not too keen on the results on the body "fur", it might be overshapened a little). Long story short: nice shot :) - Benh (talk) 21:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 19:29, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:08, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:07, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh. Daniel Case (talk) 17:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow'. 31-03-2020 (d.j.b.) 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2020 at 15:21:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Theaceae
Info Delicate beauty of the Camellia × williamsii 'Jury's Yellow' flower. Location. Garden sanctuary JonkerValley.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:21, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:21, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question This one's not in focus, did you upload the right one? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:51, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't think it's out of focus so much as the focus is sharper on the bottom half of the photo than the top. It still seems good to me and it's certainly beautiful although it's a shame there is a bit of banding in the shadows at the top. Cmao20 (talk) 19:35, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:21, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vote! --Killarnee (T•1•2) 21:52, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 00:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:10, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:57, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The Mahasattva of Truc Lam leaves the Mountain 竹林大士出山圖.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2020 at 03:34:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Landscape panoramas
Info This is a high resolution scan of a 14th century Vietnamese painting. Except that several image files have been stitched together (of which the image files fit next to each other as is), it maintains it's original colors and there's no digital manipulation of the source files. Unknown artist - restored and uploaded by A - nominated by A -- 03:34, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- A^talk 03:34, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful, but not that much information in the file description. You might want to link to https://vi.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tr%C3%BAc_L%C3%A2m_%C4%91%E1%BA%A1i_s%C4%A9_xu%E1%BA%A5t_s%C6%A1n_%C4%91%E1%BB%93 (people who don't read Vietnamese, as I don't, can get the gist through Google Translate). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:54, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hi, thanks for the advice. I will add the necessary information to the file description and will likely write the article about it on the English Wikipedia to helps people learn more about this unique painting.--A^talk 10:36, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support High-quality and detailed. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:54, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:08, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course it would be good (as Ikan mentioned) to improve the file description. --Aristeas (talk) 09:18, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question I cannot get the link to the originals to work. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: Did you mean the link that I put in the file description? I tried to visit this link but as you said, sometimes it doesn't work. I've to reload the page three times so that it shows again. I think this problem is due to their server. I'll try to replace this link with another one if I can find a good one.--A^talk 10:52, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Link works now. It would be useful to give us a preview inbetween 117 pixels and 2000 pixels height if that is possible. Single images have 853 pixels which is useful. Very difficult to view as is. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:24, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: I'm fairly new to Commons, so I'd like to ask you how and where I can place the preview? --A^talk 12:23, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ I've no idea, perhaps someone can help as it's an issue with many panoramas. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:02, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose My support struck until voting question to P.T.Đ resolved. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Đẹp lắm tác giả ơi. Nguyễn Đức ^#talk2me 12:44, 23 April 2020 (UTC)
Not eligible to vote. --A.Savin 23:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support P.T.Đ (talk) 13:40, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question How did you come to hear about this nomination, please P.T.Đ? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:06, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I get to here after reading some articles about Trần dynasty on Vietnamese Wikipedia, a famous dynasty of Vietnam. The picture has very high resolution, I like it. That's all. (Sorry for my Engrisk) P.T.Đ (talk) 17:08, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:40, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very interesting artwork. Cmao20 (talk) 13:51, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 14:27, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support rất đẹp, mình ủng hộ cho bạn! JohnsonLee01 (talk) 15:20, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not eligible to vote. --A.Savin 23:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Epic. Literally. --Peulle (talk) 17:12, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No opinion on the picture, but the apparent canvassing from Vietnamese wiki is not cool for me. --A.Savin 23:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Canvassing is forbidden, but it's also totally unnecessary, so if that's actually happening (e.g., if these users don't simply follow A), stop it now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi, I think this is a mistake. I only posted it in my gallery on Vietnamese Wikipedia, which can also be seen on my user page. I never mentioned that people should vote for it. If I had done that, I would ask the people who made a lot of contributions here on Commons, and there are quite a few such people. But I didn't do it. If you still don't believe it, you can control my contributions I made there in the last few days. --A ^(talk) 10:58, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:12, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:10, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:06, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose यह तस्वीर कुछ खास नहीं है, यह बदसूरत लग रही है।. भारतीय अधिक सुंदर दिखते हैं।. Reyansh Rajbhar (talk) 06:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not eligible to vote. Trolling? You seem to be present in every request that involving me, since I ask the admins to delete the picture that you stole from me. --A ^(talk) 09:36, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Landscape panoramas

File:4Fi00007 Port de mer d'europe restored.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2020 at 10:04:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Maps#Maps of Europe
Info created by Alfred Guesdon - restored, uploaded & nominated by S. DÉNIEL
Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:04, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - C'est un très beau dessin et une excellente reproduction. Tu es sûr que les couleurs restoreés sont justes et il n'avait uncune effet comme sepia dans l'original? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:31, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Je ne suis pas certain de la façon dont le dessin a été réalisée mais le plus probable c’est que : le dessin est fait par des traits au crayon, on a utilisé un pastel blanc pour faire les nuages, mis une « couleur de fond » qui serait peut-être un lavis et enfin certaine partie sont laissées sans rien. Après on a édité cet œuvre. Je ne connais pas le procédé de reproduction et je n’ai aucune idée si le lavis a été imprimé en couleur ou en gris. La volonté ou la nécessité pour l'auteur était d'obtenir 3 nuances plutôt que 3 couleurs. Comme j’ai refait un cadre blanc cela ne me dérange pas de proposer une version couleur. Pour moi, ça tient plus du goût de chacun que du respect de l’œuvre originale. --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Merci, S. DÉNIEL. As long as we don't know what color the paper originally was, I'll support both versions, though I prefer the colored version as a matter of taste because it feels more volumetric to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very nice reproduction! -- RootlessCosmopolitain (talk)
Thanks, but not eligible to vote yet. --A.Savin 11:46, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info created by Alfred Guesdon - restored, uploaded & nominated by S. DÉNIEL
Support--S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:12, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 22 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support je suis d'accord avec le commentaire précédent, la version colorée est plus "volumique" / I agree with previous comment, color version is more "volumic". Hellotheworld (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:02, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:08, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shenzhen Bay Bridge To HK on Shenzhen Side.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 15:32:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Others
Info created by Sparktour - uploaded by Sparktour - nominated by Sparktour -- Sparktour (talk) 15:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sparktour (talk) 15:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, the foreground shade is distracting (and the leaves in top left). —kallerna (talk) 16:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow, what is so special about this photo? --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michielverbeek. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

InfoThis image shows the unique traffic direction in Hong Kong (Where the general road direction is left-hand, but it is right-hand here. (This phenomenon is caused by the special administrative divisions between mainland China and Hong Kong, which is explained here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Left-_and_right-hand_traffic#Changing_sides_at_borders ) Sparktour (talk) 22:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That's a curiosity, and this might merit being a VI if you can find an appropriate scope, but that's no reason to consider this one of the finest pictures on the site. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:46, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination After reminded by other users, I realized that this image isn't featured enough.Sparktour (talk) 02:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mount Gvanim in Makhtesh Ramon (50807).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2020 at 14:18:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#Israel
Info created/uploaded/nominated by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I quite like this landscape but it gives me the impression that there are many elements in the composition, the weight on the right side is very large especially with the rock that has an engraving on the bottom right. The background of the back with the truck alone would have been in my humble opinion a better composition, perhaps there is some way to improve the current one. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe crop a bit more of the foreground out, but I still like it. Cmao20 (talk) 17:02, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose mainly per Wilfredor. Too much put into the frame, plus the too tight crop on the top side. Camera tilted a few degrees up may have been it. The centered pylon does not work for me either. Altogether unbalanced, everything in the right half and nothing in the left. Pity, it’s a nice scene but not an appealing composition to me. --Kreuz schnabel 20:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the top crop is a bit tight. Also, the sun is at 235 max; it's obviously burned out, it's supposed to be, it's the sun! Just let it blow out to 255 naturally, otherwise it looks grey and weird. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:47, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I'm sorry, but I think the pylon distracts the viewer's attention. MartinD (talk) 13:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MartinD. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quite random composition IMO. —kallerna (talk) 16:04, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination tend to agree with some of the comments about composition, but the nice parts seemed like it compensated. ah well. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hiddingsel, Silhouette des Orts bei Sonnenaufgang -- 2020 -- 6756.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2020 at 04:38:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 04:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay ^talk 04:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The blue fence posts are strange. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see what you were going for but I think the silhouette is just a bit much. Having so much of the photo in pitch black tends to unbalance the composition for me. Cmao20 (talk) 16:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice, but not extraordinary. —kallerna (talk) 16:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thank you. I think, it's a decision. Thank you for your reviews. --XRay ^talk 04:58, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /XRay ^talk 07:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Monacanthidae sp. (49509646021).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2020 at 04:54:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Monacanthidae_(Filefish)
Info created by Rickard Zerpe - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Ivar (talk) 04:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 04:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:24, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The species isn't specified. w:Filefish says "most species are below 60 cm (24 in) in length" but not how much smaller. If this fish is, let's say, 30 cm long, this is a fairly unsharp photo, isn't it? So I'm considering opposing, if for no other reason that a lack of enough information to make a more informed judgment, but perhaps one of you can provide this information. Off topic: Does Mr. Zerpe know that we're admirers of his work here and have featured a number of his photos? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:21, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. On July 18, 2019, I wrote: "Rickard's photos are much appreciated by the Wikimedia Commons community, and a lot of them are now Featured Pictures. Thank you so much for publishing your photos under a creative common license! :-)" in the 'Testimonials' box on his Flickr page. He has got the message but is seems he hasn't activated it to make it public. --Cart (talk) 09:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good. I'm gratified. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Nice, but not as good as existing fish FPs. —kallerna (talk) 16:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Klagenfurt Landhaus Großer Wappensaal Deckengemälde Erbhuldigung Kaiser Karls VI. 19042019 6521.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2020 at 23:19:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Painted ceilings
Info An eighteenth-century baroque fresco by the Austrian painter Josef Ferdinand Fromiller painted as a homage to Charles VI, the Holy Roman Emperor. I think Johann Jaritz has done an excellent job of capturing the fine details of the fresco with only the tiniest bit of noise. created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:19, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:19, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:31, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Moderate Support - More noise than usual for this kind of FP, nowadays, but I love the composition of the fresco, especially the nobleman who's looking out and waving. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:05, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

True, but I often find these pics to be spoilt by too much noise reduction. I prefer a fine, natural grain to a smudgy and undetailed picture any day. Thanks for your vote though - yes, I like that bit as well! Cmao20 (talk) 00:21, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Stunning. the perspective makes you think you're looking horizontally not vertically. Great capture by @Johann Jaritz: Seven Pandas (talk) 00:42, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very "3D-like" and really nice, although I'd wish a more symmetric crop. --A.Savin 02:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 03:56, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:56, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:16, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning. --Aristeas (talk) 06:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 06:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not eligible to vote. --A.Savin 13:49, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 06:53, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:54, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Super sharp detail - just soft on the edges. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:15, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:45, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support All said Poco a poco (talk) 19:45, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 20:24, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:10, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not sure about the post-processing. Contrast and saturation adjusted IMO slightly too much - it looks like a painting of a painting. —kallerna (talk) 09:03, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:07, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:56, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Half Dome with Eastern Yosemite Valley (50MP).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 16:54:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#California
Info created by Der Wolf im Wald - uploaded by Der Wolf im Wald - nominated by Tuxyso -- Tuxyso (talk) 16:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMHO a great shot! -- Tuxyso (talk) 16:54, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support When I was looking to the thumbnail, I thought that it was just another Yosemite shot but at 100 %, sharpness and detail are impressing. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:45, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:49, 2 May 2020 (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: The nominated file is merely a downsampled version of an image that has already been promoted to FP: File:Half Dome with Eastern Yosemite Valley.jpg. King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:31, 2 May 2020 (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:Portland from Pittock Mansion October 2019 panorama 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2020 at 18:52:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United States
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:52, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:52, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WB is ok? Ezarateesteban 00:46, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it's the blue hour, that's how the scene looked like to my eyes. I used a pretty typical WB setting in Photoshop: 4800 K, 0 tint. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:13, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great panorama. The colours look just a bit unnatural - maybe a touch less purple and I would buy it. However, if you feel confident with the colours, it's ok. —kallerna (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:10, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment does look very purple. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:04, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ezarate, Kallerna, Martin Falbisoner, and Charlesjsharp: I have updated the WB, please take another look. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:44, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment fine with me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:33, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Overall a tremendous and high-res panorama. Cmao20 (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:32, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:05, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ezarateesteban 16:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 01:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:35, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The mountain in the distance makes it outstanding for me. Maybe a less centered position would better. But I miss, that the mountain´s name is not given. --Milseburg (talk) 18:48, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Milseburg: I added the mountain's name to the description. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ah, Mount Hood. Very interesting. --Milseburg (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Vote --Killarnee (T•1•2) 19:28, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Milseburg (talk) 21:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Spb Vasilievsky Island StAndrew Church asv2019-09 img2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2020 at 13:26:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Russia
Info Interior of Saint Andrew's Cathedral (Saint Petersburg) on the Vasilyevsky Island ----- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 13:26, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:26, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tremendous place and high-quality photo, well done. Cmao20 (talk) 14:39, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 16:11, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:22, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Pretty, but why is the foreground grainy? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:54, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Impressive interior, but some noise the ceiling? --Isiwal (talk) 19:47, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noise in upper and lower part, as mentioned above. --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:56, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above and detail overall just ok Poco a poco (talk) 10:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info I have reworked it. --A.Savin 16:15, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Clear improvement. Still undecided for now (waiting to see if the composition grows on me more as I continue looking at it). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Here's what I'm wrestling with: the idea of looking at a bright golden place from a darker place is great, but when looking in more detail, there are areas that are really glary and so on. The result is that I remain undecided and might not vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:26, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above --Andrei (talk) 14:28, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I think this is not quite an FP, and I'm going to suggest crops on both sides. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:11, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per Ikan's comments. Daniel Case (talk) 05:13, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow IMO. —kallerna (talk) 08:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yom Kippur War. XXXVII.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2020 at 13:42:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1970-1980
Info created by Bamahane photographer - uploaded by Geagea - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 13:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nicely done and well-composed historical photograph of Yom Kippur War, depicting many prominent Israeli generals, in a military consultation meeting. -- Tomer T (talk) 13:42, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Resolution could be higher but this is a very interesting historical photo and I think it deserves a feature, especially with the detailed annotations. It somehow really conveys a feeling of tension and concern as these men plan the war effort. Cmao20 (talk) 14:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose imho compo doesn't compensate very low resolution. --Ivar (talk) 15:28, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Minimum file size not sufficient. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:20, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. However, if this historic photo is rejected on account of size, it's at least a VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:51, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Isiwal (talk) 19:21, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Can't decide. Definitely a significant historical image. Looked thru the historical FP gallery, and without even 2000px on one side, this would be indeed very small image in comparison to other FPs. The only smaller pics I found are WWI trenches and Nagasaki 1945, both promoted back in 2006. This is not quite as historically significant as these two. But is it also an action shot, capturing a historical moment not a historical thing. But then again, Iwo Jima flag has almost 3000px on one side. Renata3 (talk) 06:06, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Historical value. --Gnosis (talk) 05:39, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per the pro and contra arguments given above. --Aristeas (talk) 06:56, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Per Aristeas --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:35, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support "We will infiltrate this area ..." Or "And the generals sat, and the lines on the map / Moved from side to side" Daniel Case
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 22:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

(talk) 05:17, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Good "action shot, capturing a historical moment". -- Geagea (talk) 02:01, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1970-1980

File:Kura Tāwhiti, Castle Hill, Canterbury, New Zealand.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2020 at 23:48:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)
Info All by me. It's Castle Hill, New Zealand. It's been quite flooded by tourists since it appeared in Narnia movie. -- Podzemnik (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the composition, the light and that there aren't any tourists (lucky me!). -- Podzemnik (talk) 23:48, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Refreshing and bold, with strong lines to capture interest but enough detail to study for a long time. I like it! -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too ordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per KoH Cmao20 (talk) 15:07, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Nice details but no great overall composition to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Basotxerri (talk) 10:35, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I can see how this looks "ordinary", but for me it works very well and has a special atmosphere to it. --Domob (talk) 16:24, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per King and Domob. --Aristeas (talk) 06:59, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose imho light conditions were not special enough. --Ivar (talk) 08:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Ryan Hodnett (talk) 00:13, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a good picture, but no wow recognizable. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:08, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It might not be as dramatic as other New Zealand landscapes we've seen, but I still want to walk into this inviting summer scene. Daniel Case ([[User talk:Daniel

Case|talk]]) 17:22, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

Oppose Per Fischer --Cvmontuy (talk) 17:52, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support: very interesting geology. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 18:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Birstaler Muskat P1240336.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 14:00:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Winemaking
Info created by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 14:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Easy target, very distracting background. —kallerna (talk) 16:13, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but for me these are just some grapes and not anything special --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Good-looking grapes but no special composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Fischer.H (talk) 08:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:King Penguin Chick at Salisbury Plain (5719415947).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 07:39:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Spheniscidae (Penguins)
Info created by Liam Quinn - uploaded by Russavia - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:16, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Neither sharpness nor composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:35, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. I didn't want to be first to vote and gave this photo a chance to impress me, but recently featured bird photos are sharper than this, I do believe. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:25, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's quite cute but not enough of it is in focus for FP. I could forgive it if the chick itself were pin-sharp, but it isn't. Cmao20 (talk) 17:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 08:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common ringlet on an ox-eye daisy.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 02:08:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info: Common ringlet on an ox-eye daisy; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:08, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The butterfly itself is not quite QI and the overall composition does not compensate. Identification of the subspecies would be very helpful for VI as there are seven in Canda. Is it ssp. inornata? Very different to European Common ringlet/Large heath subspecies. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:29, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the sharpness of the butterfly is unfortunately underwhelming. --Fischer.H (talk) 12:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Insufficient DoF for my taste. I'd like at least somewhat more of the flower as well as the butterfly to be sharp. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:26, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cape ground squirrel (Xerus inauris) male.gif[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2020 at 09:57:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Sciuridae (Squirrels)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very cute. --Cayambe (talk) 10:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cayambe. Is this a set? :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not really a set. One image was taken much nearer than the other so I had to adjust size, align and crop before creating my first gif for FPC. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Indeed very cute ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 18:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice, but I don't think a 2-frame combo needs to be a GIF; it could work just fine as a set of two JPEGs. Also, note that Commons support for downsampled GIFs is poor; viewing at anything but 100%, I see lots of artifacts and patchy color. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:55, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 14:17, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry Charles, have gone back and forth on this but I just don't see the point of GIF here. All it does is makes the quality poorer by restricting the palette to 256 colours, plus if I wanted to use these photos to illustrate the squirrel I'd much prefer the flexibility of two separate JPEGs rather than a single moving image. Cmao20 (talk) 16:54, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same. Not seeing the point of a GIF here. - Benh (talk) 17:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 20:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Cmao20. —kallerna (talk) 16:20, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose also agree with cmao, but points for trying something unusual for FPC. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, and the display is jerky on my screen, making this gif non-flowing. Interesting idea, though -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:52, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:17, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2020-04-21-Mediapark Drone-001.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2020 at 12:16:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany
Info created and uploaded by Superbass - nominated by MB-one -- MB-one (talk) 12:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MB-one (talk) 12:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice shot. Not sure about copyright: FoP-Germany not valid for aerial photo IMO. --A.Savin 13:35, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment i think that any copyrighted object would be considered deminimis within this context. --MB-one (talk) 17:20, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's not as simple, see de:Mediapark: "Den im Februar 1987 anschließenden Ideenwettbewerb gewann im April 1988 der deutsch-kanadische Architekt Eberhard Zeidler aus Toronto". Media Park seems to be a concept as a whole, not just a random handful of buildings. --A.Savin 00:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - That would suck. I guess, we have to ask for an expert's opinion here. @Gnom: can you enlighten us? --MB-one (talk) 13:29, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Per A.Savin, it would be best to contact w:Eberhard Zeidler through his firm and ask for a release. --Gnom (talk)

Support I always think we should not let copyright concerns affect our !votes at FPC. The two processes (FPC and DR) should be allowed to run their course in parallel. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know enough about the FoP situation but if it's OK then this is definitely FP, would be a shame if it had to be deleted Cmao20 (talk) 15:19, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:38, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 06:52, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I dissent. This is certainly a QI and a VI if nominated (please nominate it at COM:VIC), but the composition does nothing for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:30, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this complies with German law, although I'm not sure if the drone mount of the camera is considered an artificial support within the meaning of the statute. Daniel Case (talk) 17:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
With the German law, it complies of course -- you are allowed to create such pictures and to use them for non-commercial purpose. --A.Savin 19:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:City hall of Weimar (2).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2020 at 10:03:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 10:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 10:03, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not much in the way of wow factor, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 11:02, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. --Basotxerri (talk) 13:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Disagree with the above here. The pic is sharp, good quality, high-res and shot under nice if subtle lighting. I suppose it's a subjective matter whether the motif has enough inherent interest to be FP, but it does for me, and I doubt it could have been done much better. Cmao20 (talk) 15:17, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:43, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, but I wonder if a dead-on picture of the city hall and the building to its right could be an FP. I don't know, but I'd like to see more of that building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Good points pro (Cmao20) and contra (others) ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the converging lines created by the buildings and the clouds. Daniel Case (talk) 01:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Malayopython reticulatus, Reticulated python - Kaeng Krachan District, Phetchaburi Province (47924282891).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2020 at 09:44:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Pythonidae_(Pythons)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by B2Belgium - nominated by Ivar (talk) 09:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:44, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:16, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Com:FVC --Killarnee (T•1•2) 11:05, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - It's good to remind people about FVC, but how is it relevant to your votes here? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:24, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:07, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose As colorful and sharp at the head as it is, I still find the background distracting, even if it is part of the snake as well. Daniel Case (talk) 21:19, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Daniel expresses it well. That's why I haven't voted and might never vote pro or con on this nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support sharpness is fine for me here. --PierreSelim (talk) 10:22, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Pythonidae_(Pythons)

File:Urospermum dalechampii in Herault 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2020 at 10:00:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Cichorioideae
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 10:00, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Beautiful pic and nice composition but it could be sharper. Cmao20 (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality image but the specimen is not particularly exceptional. Perhaps it's just the side view that doesn't work, perhaps the background a bit cluttered -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:47, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:20, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support - I suspect some of the reason for this one being neglected (or at least it is for me) is because the subject/light looks like it might be one of Ermell's recent projects, and then people see that yes, it's a nice picture indeed, but it's not some crazy feat of focus stacking. Like nominating a picture of a church interior shortly after a string of Diliff nominations... I think it's worth a support, though. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Orchid at USBG (18160).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2020 at 14:42:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Orchidaceae
Info A Cattlianthe Gold Digger ‘Orglade's Mandarin’ orchid at the United States Botanic Garden. It's not the typical isolated flower with smooth background, but I think it works. The main subject is sharp, but I primarily like the segements of green leaves, reddish aerial roots, and bright sunlit yellow flower (it was the only flower to catch a beam of light in an otherwise dim room). Created/uploaded/nominated by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:42, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light. Cmao20 (talk) 15:21, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment the flowers are quite nice, but I don't like the straggly bits on the left. 60mm lens has kept them in focus - too much DoF. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:04, 25 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Com:FVC --Killarnee (T•1•2) 11:07, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose it's without a doubt of high quality and somewhat nice to look at, but it lacks this wow factor of a FP to me. --MB-one (talk) 13:22, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the lighting and the composition, the 'straggly bits on the left' included :-). --Cayambe (talk) 19:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cayambe. --Aristeas (talk) 06:51, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I consider the aerial roots a feature in this composition. They form a vertical bar of red on the left, which, together with another vertical bar of green on the right, nicely frames the flowers in the center. The whole lighting situation is somewhat unconventional with lots of shadows and highlights all across the main subject (the petals). It's a bit on the busy side, but over-all this creates a really nice jungle vibe. I find this very refreshing among all those mugshot-type pictures of centered single flowers on plain backgrounds we usually have here. --El Grafo (talk) 09:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:28, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others, especially El Grafo. And the orchids are beautifully lit and photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quick story: I had noticed a couple other people with cameras in the room, off to the side, acting strangely. I wondered if they were waiting for people to clear out or something. ...No, in fact just as I was taking this picture there was a wedding proposal just behind me, and the photographers jumped out and started taking pictures. Somewhere there is a lovely wedding proposal picture with me in the background, leaning awkwardly, trying to get a good shot of this orchid. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works better at full size. Daniel Case (talk) 06:11, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 17:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Münster, LWL-Museum für Kunst und Kultur, Lichtkunstwerk "Silberne Frequenz" -- 2020 -- 6445.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2020 at 04:40:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Other_sculptures
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 04:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay ^talk 04:40, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:16, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:36, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like especially the endless reflections of the surroundings in the spheres. --Aristeas (talk) 07:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. I've enjoyed your series of photos of this sculpture on QIC and was expecting you to nominate your favorite of the series. This is fun to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:13, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 10:17, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:36, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support the reflections make it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 14:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This one is great. Cmao20 (talk) 16:58, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 19:57, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Strong Poco a poco (talk) 20:14, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 20:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 01:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow --Sonya7iv (talk) 10:17, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vote --Killarnee (T•1•2) 19:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support I've been looking forward to casting this !vote. Daniel Case (talk) 00:48, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Khalili Collections A Composite Imaginary View of Japan.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2020 at 10:18:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Others#Textiles
Info High-resolution scan using the Google Art camera, shared by the Khalili Foundation as part of its GLAM partnership - uploaded by MartinPoulter - nominated by MartinPoulter -- MartinPoulter (talk) 10:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MartinPoulter (talk) 10:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful at every level of resolution up to 100%. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:19, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:31, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! Cmao20 (talk) 17:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 20:25, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:46, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:36, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:05, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:19, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:15, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment no dimensions?--BevinKacon (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Others#Textiles

File:Auschwitz shoes 2019.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2020 at 14:17:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing and textiles
Info created by kallerna - uploaded by kallerna - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 14:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Please, consider the fact that this exhibition is behind a glass, which might influence the quality. -- Andrei (talk) 14:17, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ... and it's not a historical photo. 16:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)
Weak support I think we definitely need an FP of this harrowing motif, but the quality could be better seeing that anyone visiting this place could reproduce a similar shot. Cmao20 (talk) 19:27, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Sharp enough, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:58, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 20:28, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 05:38, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:49, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:24, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp enough for a static object. In addition, you should apply the same strict standards to yourself that you demand from others. Je-str (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment (@Cmao20): Precisely because it is a harrowing motif and easily repeatable, a good technical quality is important. Je-str (talk) 14:48, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I did not create the nomination. Please vote for the photo, not the creator. The creator should not affect your motives for voting. —kallerna (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Je-str comments word by word --Poco a poco (talk) 19:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Neutral Not possible to use tripod in that place, but ofc better camera could be used. —kallerna (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose hard not to agree with creator. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:51, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 17:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:17, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna and Charlesjsharp -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:View from Doubrava 2019.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2020 at 16:26:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Czech Republic
Info All by me. -- T.Bednarz (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Since it's passed QIC, let's try to push it even further. -- T.Bednarz (talk) 16:26, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Why not, nice atmosphere. Cmao20 (talk) 17:03, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there are a fair few dust spots and clone stamp marks. Crossing out my vote for now. Cmao20 (talk) 15:57, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose A lot of dust spots and clone stamp marks ruin the overall unusually atmosphere.--Ermell (talk) 19:38, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the cables are a problem. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:46, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. --Basotxerri (talk) 20:08, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - The cables are no problem for me - they're just lines! But do work on the problems noted by Ermell. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice, but I would second the request to work on the problems spotted by Ermell. --Aristeas (talk) 09:18, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell. --Fischer.H (talk) 13:33, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Primarily the dust spots, but even if they were fixed this wouldn't have worked. I can see what the photographer was trying for but, as I've said before, sometimes our reach exceeds our grasp. Daniel Case (talk) 20:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:View from Pico dos Barcelos on Funchal 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2020 at 16:39:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Portugal
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 16:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 16:39, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice panorama, seems sharp enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 19:36, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - There are a bunch of dust spots near the top margin, especially fairly close to the left corner, but also in other parts of the photo. When you fix them all, I'll consider the nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:54, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Thanks for the hint --Llez (talk) 06:16, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Looks like you got 'em all. I'm undecided on the composition for now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:42, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice panoramic! MartinD (talk) 17:17, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vote! --Killarnee (T•1•2) 21:51, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's probably best not to ask for votes for FVC on this page. Canvassing is usually frowned upon. Cmao20 (talk) 23:23, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral The railing on the right cut and the roof of the building on the lower left give a feeling of cut composition. Also this last building has a dirty and neglected surface that is a little distracting. It is a large image and very well detailed --Wilfredor (talk) 12:32, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Little stitching error at the wall bottom right but overall very good.--Ermell (talk) 22:16, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Thanks --Llez (talk) 07:07, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:54, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Distracting foreground. —kallerna (talk) 08:58, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:10, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:City experiment in gardening, New York City LCCN93501876.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2020 at 23:32:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1920-1930
Info created by Fæ - uploaded by Fæ - nominated by Rootless Cosmopolitan -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 23:32, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm nominating/supporting this image on the basis of its historical value. -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 23:32, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Great photo, and I'd like to add that this is in Bryant Park, but I think it could use just a little bit of restoration. It's in fine condition, so it isn't a huge job but I think it's worth it for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 26 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Caution: El Grafo over-analyzing again. Read at your own risk, BYO grain of salt. Is there anyone around here with advanced experiences in making darkroom prints from B&W negatives? I've got some thoughts on this, but lacking practical experience I'm really just hypothesizing here: There's a strong difference in contrast between different sections of the frame. The background is rather bright, very flat, almost foggy; the middle ground with the main subjects is very contrasty with hard shadows, suggesting strong sunlight; and the soil also shows a gradient in contrast and brightness towards the lower left corner. It's entirely possible to encounter atmospheric conditions like this, and the darker soil in the centre of the image may be due to different levels of organic matter content (darker = more manure/dung). However, to me it looks like that was (at least partially) done on purpose during print through dodging/burning (they already did that in the 1920s, right?). And it makes sense to do that, as our mind tends to focus on areas of high contrast. But here's where it's getting tricky: Bright areas also attract the eyes, and mine are drawn towards the bright background much more than they are drawn to the contrasty subject. The latter mostly consists of totally crushed blacks with a few almost purely white spots (shirts) in it. I'm tempted to call this print "over-processed".

Anyway, I do like the composition a lot. I find the subject very interesting. I enjoy how the buildings seem to disappear in the fog (or maybe more likely air pollution). And on top of all of this, this picture was created by one of the pioneers of photography, so who am I to criticize her? But ultimately, to me the picture fails at one core aspect: depicting the main subject. And I think that might be one of the reasons for the low participation in this vote so far: It's a great shot with lots of potential, but it's not quite doing what it was supposed to do – leaving mixed feelings among reviewers. --El Grafo (talk) 09:25, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Very interesting ~~motif~~ subject, but I am waiting – see Ikan’s comment — for a bit of restauration work. --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:11, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 08:26, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Upper Salmon River9.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2020 at 00:30:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#New Brunswick
Info: Upper Salmon River shrouded in fog, Fundy National Park, New Brunswick, Canada; panoramic version of the previous nomination. All by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:23, 21 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:30, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This scene contains good compositions that could be cropped from it, but it doesn't work for me as a whole. Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I actually like the pano more than the single-frame photo, the composition is more satisfying. Cmao20 (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:32, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan --Andrei (talk) 08:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:21, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The light is not working for me. Dull -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I liked the covered-bridge picture more. This one just doesn't stand out enough for me. Daniel Case (talk) 02:47, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chiesa della Martorana Palermo mosaico angelo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2020 at 09:31:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Italy
InfoI like the movement, the richness and the combination of different styles, antique Roman (the columns and capitals), bizantine and baroque reflecting the richness of palermitan art history. All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:31, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:31, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question why the rotated view? Off-putting to my eyes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:46, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The angles of view in this type of ambience can be extremely articulated and in churches often limited. As I said in this picture I like the variety --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 12:22, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose OK, but doesn't work for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:33, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seems beautiful to me, I think it's OK to have church shots that are a bit different. Cmao20 (talk) 15:43, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. That's a fine QC and of course the res is huge, letting us appreciate all the fine details. But that really feels like a random composition. - Benh (talk) 16:36, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like an Escher painting! -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 06:49, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not eligible to vote. --A.Savin 13:50, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looking again and again at this photo, I think the unusual composition is a very interesting attempt to capture the overhelming splendor of this church. --Aristeas (talk) 10:15, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition, angle. Column and painting with frame cut at the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:06, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I understand, from your answer to Charles, what you were trying to do. But while that makes the image interesting it does not make it FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 03:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp --Cvmontuy (talk) 00:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Offbeat composition but nice to look at. It's a shame FPC is so conventional sometimes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:11, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 19:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Porte d'Amont (Étretat).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2020 at 13:52:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Normandy
Info Natural arch Porte d'Amont near Étretat, Normady, France. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 13:52, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 13:52, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Centered composition; in general, breaking the rules of composition needs to serve some higher purpose, and I just don't see that here. We can use more rocks in the lower right and less sky. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:00, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition is a little bland, and I think the light is really harsh (and renders harsher on a white rock). - Benh (talk) 16:33, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A good quality photo but I agree with Benh that the composition is a bit bland. I'm not sure placing the horizon in the middle was the right idea, perhaps a photo with more at the bottom might be close to FP. Cmao20 (talk) 16:49, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The opposes have points but not enough to make me join them. Daniel Case (talk) 19:58, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful -- Spurzem (talk) 17:08, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 19:14, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Brescia Orologio Piazza Loggia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2020 at 23:13:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Horology
Info A tremendous pic of the astronomical clock in the Torre dell'Orologio, a sixteenth-century tower in Brescia, Italy. This beautiful clock is a major landmark in the city and I think Moroder has captured it really well here - the sharpness at full-res for a 51mpx image is very impressive. Surely the best photo of this clock on the internet. created by Moroder - uploaded by Moroder - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:13, 27 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:35, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 06:47, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not eligible to vote. --A.Savin 13:48, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:58, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 11:03, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:00, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is there a way to crop more on left and right? those areas are not symmetrical and are uninteresting (I'd almost say ugly). I also believe that a square crop would make the motif stronger --Poco a poco (talk) 19:44, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco: , I'll put up an alternative with a square crop, but it'll have to wait till tomorrow. Cmao20 (talk) 23:14, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Have you asked Moroder how he feels about your editing his photo? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:49, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I shouldn’t have thought that would be necessary merely for putting up an alternate crop. If I were editing and overwriting the original image, of course I would ask him, but that is a very different situation. A Commons license allows the production of derivative works as long as they are properly attributed to the creator - so there is no problem with uploading a different crop. Cmao20 (talk) 12:38, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Ermell (talk) 22:12, 28 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically great, but no wow IMHO. —kallerna (talk) 09:00, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this version better as it provides more context. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Frank Schulenburg --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 04:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I prefer the other version Poco a poco (talk) 19:59, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Info A completely square crop isn't possible as the clock itself isn't square, but hopefully this is what you were thinking of Poco. Pinging everyone who has voted (either pro or anti) or commented so far: @Aristeas, XRay, Poco a poco, Ikan Kekek, Kallerna, Ermell, Fischer.H, and Agnes Monkelbaan: . Also @Moroder: to make sure you're OK with this. I think I have credited you properly in the alt version by using all the templates you used on the original photo. Brilliant photo btw :) Cmao20 (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Cmao20 (talk) 14:18, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per creator’s wishes. Cmao20 (talk) 13:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support IMO OK too --XRay ^talk 14:23, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Personally, I would just crop a bit at the right of the original version to get symmetry, but this version is OK, too ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 18:29, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose To make things clear, sorry: I prefer the other version. --Aristeas (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per Aristeas.--Ermell (talk) 20:01, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support You nailed it, thank you Poco a poco (talk) 20:59, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:25, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:42, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:24, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I prefer the other version --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 06:03, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:37, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

The chosen alternative is: File:Brescia Orologio Piazza Loggia.jpg

File:Ksiaz - zamek 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 08:37:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Poland
Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 08:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 08:37, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:28, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great wow and colors, but some technical notes: The left edge is leaning in a tiny bit, and the right edge is leaning in a bit more. This suggests that there is both keystoning as well as a slight counterclockwise tilt. Also, could you ensure that you have stitched this in rectilinear (aka perspective) mode, as opposed to say cylindrical, and that geometric (e.g. fisheye, pincushion) distortion correction is turned on? If that's already the case then no worries, maybe that's just how the building looks; it seems to be bulging a bit so I just wanted to check. Finally, the WB is just slightly on the green side for my tastes. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:31, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Jar.ciurus: Can you please fix? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wonder which sharpening method was used here, as it looks both over- and undersharpened to me at the same time. Everyone feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, but based on the haloes along strong edges (roofs and walls meeting the sky) I would guess that a bit too much unsharp masking or similar was applied. Textured surfaces (like walls, roofs, and foliage), on the other hand, look a bit soft and flat. Maybe a pinch of increased local contrast/high-pass sharpening/"clarity" would help to make it pop? --El Grafo (talk) 13:03, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with El Grafo's comments about the photo at full size, but it's fine for a >40mpx file. Try this 10mpx downsample and see how sharp it is - this is clearly FP quality. Cmao20 (talk) 17:44, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 21:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. Of course, if the tilt recognized by King could be fixed, and if the sharpening could be improved (as El Grafo rightly states), the photo would be even better. @Jar.ciurus: Your photo is worth the additional effort ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 13:07, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 16:59, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao Daniel Case (talk) 17:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality, lighting and motif Poco a poco (talk) 19:08, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:39, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Papavero comune interno.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 07:06:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Ranunculaceae
InfoInterior of a common poppy, pistil with pollen scattered on the inside of the petals created by PROPOLI87 - uploaded by PROPOLI87 - nominated by PROPOLI87 -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 07:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 07:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No depth of field. See nom. below. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Insufficient depth of field for FP, though what you do focus on is nice to see. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not striking enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:06, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan, pretty but the depth of field is not high enough. Cmao20 (talk) 15:57, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. And maybe it's time to consider withdrawing the nom. Daniel Case (talk) 04:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delist 151.61.38.128 09:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87151.61.38.128 09:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think you mean to use the "withdraw" template. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I intended to withdraw the candidacy PROPOLI87 (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 15:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:38, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Allium tricoccum - Stouffville.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2020 at 14:04:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Amaryllidaceae
Info: Wild leeks (Allium tricoccum) growing in a forest tract; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:04, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Good quality, but not interesting to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:53, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I really don't know what is so special about this --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:05, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 11:11, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lago Ober, Alemania, 2019-05-17, DD 98.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2020 at 15:39:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info View of the calm Obersee, Germany. The natural lake is located in the extreme southeast Berchtesgadener Land district of Bavaria, near the Austrian border. All of the lake is located within the Berchtesgaden National Park and southeast of the much larger and famous Königssee. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 15:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 15:39, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful photo. The hut adds something to the composition and makes it FP to me. There are quite a few blown highlights though, I think to be honest the whole picture could do with being half a stop darker. Still good though. Cmao20 (talk) 15:54, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cmao20: Agree, I've reduced the exposure, Poco a poco (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Excellent. I probably prefer this to the other one now. Cmao20 (talk) 20:04, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - The reflections and obliquely lit tree make an already nice picture special. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Very nice, but could my suggested crop work better, removing some dusty foreground and the end of the boardwalk and the nasty pole on the right? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Charlesjsharp: I got rid of the pole, FYI too, Sonya7iv Poco a poco (talk) 19:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks, much better Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:41, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay ^talk 11:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too harsh light IMO. —kallerna (talk) 16:06, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support ~~I don't like the pole on the right, but~~ The composition is remarkable --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:53, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

adorable --Sonya7iv (talk) 20:09, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 20:01, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Interesting scenery but the light is a bit harsh, and the crop tight at the bottom -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:55, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support (weak because of the harsh light, sorry, else really beautiful) --Aristeas (talk) 13:26, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm missing the Great Devil's Horn. It's hidden by clouds which are partly seems to be overexposed. Sorry. --Milseburg (talk) 18:42, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately the clouds are overexposed --Llez (talk) 09:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Lovely scene but the light on the clouds, dock and beach is just too much. Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Llez. --Ivar (talk) 04:43, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Nice spot in wrong time. --Mile (talk) 13:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Oh, what a "surprise", my dear friend Mile "The Impartial" participating for the first time since March in a FPC nom is now back to give the decisive vote! :) Please, hurry up and vote somewhere else, otherwise it will really look kind of eye-catching --Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Osmia cornuta nest (48325765867).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 19:07:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family_:_Megachilidae_(Leafcutting_Bees)
Info created & uploaded by GillesSM - nominated by Ivar (talk) 19:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:07, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Abacus or Connect four ? 🐛 :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:19, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looking at the thumbnail I thought it was a shoe rack or something. Wow, the beauty of nature! -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is not really nature King of. This is a man-made structure used for scientific research. None of the larvae will survive now that the nesting tubes have been cut open. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Palauenc05 (talk) 09:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 17:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:34, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:26, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family_:_Megachilidae_(Leafcutting_Bees)

File:Buchberg Waldimpression 20200422 01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 05:16:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Fagaceae
Info Young leaves of European Beech (Fagus sylvatica). All by me --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice light, but I don't quite get the composition. Maybe a more detailed view on the leaves could work. —kallerna (talk) 07:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. It's nice enough but I don't see what makes the photo exceptional.--Peulle (talk) 11:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna and Peulle. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:35, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, it's a nice study of nature but the composition doesn't quite rise to FP for me. What I think might have worked would be if the big branch that cuts diagonally across the pic were placed so that it started off lined up with the bottom right corner and could then lead the eye gently upwards across the frame. Cmao20 (talk) 23:54, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:55, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Antoine-François Callet - Louis XVI, roi de France et de Navarre (1754-1793), revêtu du grand costume royal en 1779 - Google Art Project.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2020 at 00:03:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Paintings
Info Portrait of Louis XVI, King of France & Navarre, in coronation robes - created by Antoine-Françoise Callet - uploaded by Dcoetzee - nominated by Alsakan -- Alsakan (talk) 00:03, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This Versailles painting is by far one of the best historical examples of French coronation portraits as well as the one with the highest quality we have on here -- Alsakan (talk) 00:03, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support VarunSoon (talk) 06:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." This vote was your 6th edit. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. --Cart (talk) 18:22, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Paris 16 (talk) 00:30, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - But it's either not an impressive painting or the reproduction doesn't capture what's great about it, so I'm thinking VI (for which this should be nominated, regardless of the results here). However, I'll cross out this opposing vote if there's an otherwise unanimous consensus to feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:19, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Hmm, I do like the painting and the quality is good overall, but there is a lot of visible JPEG artefacting in the darker areas. Cmao20 (talk) 14:27, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20: I'm not seeing it - could you annotate where? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:18, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@King of Hearts: , they are visible across quite a lot of the painting but I have noted two areas where they are most prominent. It's not hugely noticeable which is why I voted neutral rather than oppose, but at 100% I can clearly see the blockiness that evidences too much JPEG compression. Cmao20 (talk) 16:52, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose very low resolution for a canvas of 278 cm (109.4 in); Width: 196 cm (77.1 in).--BevinKacon (talk)
Weak oppose per Bevin. Daniel Case (talk) 20:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:30, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:DianaCazadoraMaderaMexico2020p2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2020 at 05:56:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Figurines and statuettes
Info created by Cvmontuy - uploaded by Cvmontuy - nominated by Cvmontuy -- Cvmontuy (talk) 05:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cvmontuy (talk) 05:56, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Neat. Excellent technical quality and something we don't see every day.--Peulle (talk) 08:36, 29 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:55, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 07:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality is good but not a FP to me if the piece is not valuable for a good reason (material, age, museum highlight,...) Poco a poco (talk) 19:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:30, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Figurines and statuettes

File:Leucanthemum vulgare.jpeg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2020 at 14:46:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Family : Asteraceae (Sunflowers)
Info: Ox-eye daisy (Leucanthemum vulgare); all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:46, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice and simple composition; would be better just a hair brighter to really make the white and yellow pop out. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:50, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done getting it this centered. Cmao20 (talk) 17:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vote --Killarnee (T•1•2) 19:31, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very nice shape of all the petals, collectively. They create a nice rhythm for the eyes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:13, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 00:41, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I thought it was "just another centered flower" but came to like it because of the right exposure, rendering nice texture on the petals, and the good DOF giving just the good amount of blur on the background. - Benh (talk) 06:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support especially because of the detailled rendering of the petals. --Aristeas (talk) 13:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 17:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support However, a non-centric composition would be better --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:28, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done Poco a poco (talk) 19:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The photographic equivalent of a rung bell's nice clear tone ... Daniel Case (talk) 21:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support a bit surprised seeing myself supporting this, but: per Benh and Daniel. --El Grafo (talk) 13:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales#Family : Asteraceae (Sunflowers)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Côte d'Albâtre à l´Aiguille de Belval.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2020 at 21:27:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Normandy
Info Alabaster coast between Étretat and Yport, Normandy, France. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 21:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 21:27, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 12:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:52, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 19:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Spurzem (talk) 16:59, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although it is a bit oversharpened IMO --Llez (talk) 17:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support However, looking at the horizon it looks a tiny bit tilted cw to me --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:25, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Uoaei1 Poco a poco (talk) 19:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:35, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Flower Art for A Sharp Eye.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2020 at 11:51:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Other
Info Page 28 from my new free magazine which gives hints on improving your wildlife photography during lockdown and encourages photographers to contribute to Commons and Wikipedia. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:51, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice work on the magazine! This is a fun collage and I think it deserves FP. It's purely artistic rather than illustrative, but there's nothing wrong with that. Cmao20 (talk) 17:53, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20, something quite unusual to see here. Thank you also for you new magazine — I hope it will both inspire photographers and win new contributors for Commons. --Aristeas (talk) 13:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too small, and other problems. Note that my vote has no link with the magazine, just with this nomination.

Firstly, the resolution is ridiculously weak for a FPC! Without the black frame, only 1250 x 1270 px? Less than the minimum requested in the guidelines. And I see no justification for such a tiny size, on the contrary, since it is a photomontage, we could expect larger than what the camera recorded.
Secondly, too kitsch for my personal taste. Of course it is "cute" and colorful, but frankly this is also too repetitive. Aesthetically, that style reminds me the dot stickers of my childhood :-) It occupies the time, but creativity is also very limited. Although I love Arcimboldo, Octavio Ocampo and Oleg Shuplyak, I really don't think these patterns are up to this art. It lacks subtlety and singularity in my view.
Thirdly, a butterfly on a real flower, with a true photographic composition (and its natural flaws, giving life and soul) would have been much better in my opinion. Now I just see a huge black background, glaring colors, and a boring copy-paste method.

Sorry, this is maybe innovative compared to what we're used to meet here, but personally I don't like this patchwork. Looks too artificial, and it lacks poetry in the way I feel. Your pictures of animals in their natural environment are usually a thousand times more captivating. -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:00, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I had uploaded the version I used for the magazine. A higher resolution version is now uploaded
but it’s still kitch!. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes:D However, with this new resolution also come new issues, in particular the sharpness now is far from homogeneous. Compare the blue butterfly for example, to the red bug it hosts, at full resolution the rendering is technically flawed -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Sorry, I kind of agree with Basile. The size is fine now, but though this is cute and creative, the overall composition isn't doing much for me. Too much blank space, I guess. However, good luck on the magazine, an exciting venture! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:06, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An interesting project and best of luck with the magazine, but I agree with the other opposers. Daniel Case (talk) 21:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:37, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Liebenfels Rosenbichl Landschaft mit Bäumen und Feldern 27042020 7458.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2020 at 05:28:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Carinthia
Info created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Johann Jaritz -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:28, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The path helps connect the three groups of trees together. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:37, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support ok for me Ezarateesteban 16:44, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:27, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a good shot but no wow recognizable. --Fischer.H (talk) 14:12, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:53, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The wow for me is in the thoughtful composition, which is something I think you are generally very good at. Cmao20 (talk) 16:59, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:34, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- excellent composition and colors. Seven Pandas (talk) 19:56, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 20:24, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Fischer.H – good but not outstanding IMHO. Makes me think, "so what?" --Kreuz schnabel 20:32, 30 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support You want to walk right into the road.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:14, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Llez (talk) 05:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Famberhorst. --Aristeas (talk) 09:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per FischerH nice photo, but not something very special --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:34, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michielverbeek - charming, but not a great composition, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:34, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition is nothing but excellent, but that alone doen't cut it for a landscape. There is a FP in this scene, but I'm not convinced that this is it. Exposure is a bit too bright for me, details are lost on the path. Sky and lighting are not bad but a bit meh, not enough to make me go wow. Maybe it was a bit early in the year and more juicy green would have worked better? If you've got the chance to go there again, definitely give it another try, whether this nom is successful or not. --El Grafo (talk) 12:37, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 21:24, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I get the opposes, but just finding pleasing — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Would work with better sky and lighting, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 17:10, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. —kallerna (talk) 06:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral This one is tough, I like the compo and the colors but the wow feeling is moderate and I find the shadow at the bottom right disturbing Poco a poco (talk) 18:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Pyrops connectens - Khao Sok National Park (41895867640).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2020 at 11:22:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Fulgoridae_(Planthoppers,_Lanternflies)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by Dianakc - nominated by Ivar (talk) 11:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 11:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I've never seen a cockroach with a long tail like this one. It's regrettable that the tail is cut off, but this is still a fascinating picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That's a leg, not the tail. The animal should be identified if possible (it certainly looks like a cockroach). But we shouldn't promote this until the description is corrected. The image does not show any licking going on. ̴̴̃Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 15:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:05, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 03:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. -- Spurzem (talk) 16:41, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 06:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Rocky Masum (talk) 13:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:15, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Palauenc05 (talk) 17:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--GRDN711 (talk) 17:46, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 14:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Fulgoridae_(Planthoppers,_Lanternflies)

File:SL Ussangoda NP asv2020-01 img06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2020 at 10:15:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Sri Lanka
Info Beach landscape in the Ussangoda National Park, Southern Province, Sri Lanka ----- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 10:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 10:15, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful, peaceful and deserted, almost as if it had already been under lockdown then. I wish I could be there now, but that aside, it has a nice composition helped by the subtle clouds and ocean waves. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:06, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support A rule of thirds crop would be much better. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The creamy sky is a plus. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:55, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 13:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. Cmao20 (talk) 15:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quiet -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:07, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. --Isiwal (talk) 19:24, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:09, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Quality and mood are good but the wow effect is limited to me Poco a poco (talk) 18:59, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Ikan, a nice stress-relief image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Violet sabrewing (Campylopterus hemileucurus mellitus) male in flight.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2020 at 13:25:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Trochilidae (Hummingbirds)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:25, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support --Sonya7iv (talk) 15:21, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Brilliant, wow! Basile Morin (talk) 16:04, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Such high quality on a hummingbird is rare. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:34, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:56, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:01, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 17:33, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A perfect capture.--Peulle (talk) 18:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support +++ An excellent photo, everything important part is sharp --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:45, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per everyone else. Really impressive! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 03:17, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:39, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:07, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! -- Spurzem (talk) 16:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful! --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per others.--Ermell (talk) 06:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Oversharpened a bit? --Llez (talk) 14:16, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 14:54, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support but the flash was very strong here. - Benh (talk) 11:32, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Marienweiher Basilika 923185001 HDR1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2020 at 06:42:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
Info created & uploaded by User:Ermell - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I find this church very attractive, I enjoy the mixture of good natural light and some bright electric light, and I particularly enjoy the golden light and bunch of different interesting elements at the altar. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 09:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Leaning in slightly on both sides. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:58, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ermell: Pinging creator for a fix. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done I hope it worked.--Ermell (talk) 22:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the fix. NR is still a bit overdone, but I'll look past minor pixel-level flaws given the 56 MP resolution. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:35, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I agree with the rationale in the nomination but I think the noise reduction has gone too far, especially at the altar it is quite smudgy and undetailed. I will give it a weak support since it looks better when downsampled. Cmao20 (talk) 14:48, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Only the ropes of the lights in the foreground and the window niches are leaning in slightly. The ropes of the lights in the choir are OK. It will not be easy to find the balance that everyone likes. Noise reduction as well. --Isiwal (talk) 19:14, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 22:25, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Sure thing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:07, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 12:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It does lack detail and looks overprocessed on the other side the subject is nice and the resolution is high Poco a poco (talk) 18:44, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:25, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:21, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:PAPAVERO COMUNE IN UN PRATO NEL MAGGIO 2020.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2020 at 08:18:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Papaveraceae
InfoPoppies are considered weeds,but with their red color, they embellish any outdoor space and impose themselves for the liveliness of the colors, they grow spontaneously both in cultivated land, in the middle of wheat fields, and in meadows. Poppy is the flower symbol of the Italian partisan struggle in the Second World War. Poppy as a symbol of remembrance. The tradition comes from a poem of 1915 called 'In Flanders Fields' written by John McCrae and dedicated to a friend of his who died in battle. In the first verses the poet cites poppies as the first flowers that appear in the rough field after the battle. created by PROPOLI87 - uploaded by PROPOLI87 - nominated by [[User:{{subst:PROPOLI87}}|]] -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:18, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Better depth of field than the last nomination, but no great composition. One specific issue is the random bit of another flower on top. The grass on the left and the glary light don't help, either. Probably a QI, I think? But I'm not sure what would happen if it went to Consensual Review. You might consider posting some photos at COM:Photography critiques for some specific advice. You might have to wait a while, but when people do post there, they are helpful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:26, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, thank you for the advice. I didn't know about the existence of COM: Photography critiques. I'll try. Every day you learn something here. It's a good thing!PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:36, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose My critique is this: simplify. Red is a very powerful color and must be used carefully. The cut-off flower at the top and the flower at the bottom left simply compete for attention and distract from the main subject. Additionally, there is quite a bit of glare which robs the colors of their richness; you'll find that cloudy days are often better for photographing flowers. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with KoH. I think what this image lacks is a careful composition, the fragments of other flowers at the top and bottom distract from the main subject too much. I agree with Ikan that it might be a good idea to try Photography critiques. Also, just to note, I think the category is wrong, the common poppy belongs to the family Papaveraceae as opposed to Ranunculaceae. Cmao20 (talk) 14:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King. Daniel Case (talk) 05:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 16:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Saimiri boliviensis boliviensis - Karlsruhe Zoo 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2020 at 05:50:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Order : Primates (Primates)
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 05:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question A dracula monkey? --Wilfredor (talk) 12:27, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- No, a Pippi Longstocking monkey, perhaps the brother of Mr. Nilsson --Llez (talk) 12:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems a clear FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 15:50, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:28, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:31, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 12:49, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Awkward pose, harsh light, odd composition. A zoo image, IMO not as good as existing primate FPs. —kallerna (talk) 15:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:50, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:30, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. Sorry, but this is far behind the competition. --El Grafo (talk) 12:22, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Detail is good but at cost of using the flash which didn't help in the outcome, sorry --Poco a poco (talk) 16:32, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:40, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - agree that this is below the bar set by other FPs. Renata3 (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, harsh light. Daniel Case (talk) 02:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good -- Spurzem (talk) 17:10, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Order : Primates (Primates)

File:Fiordo de Geiranger desde Flydalsjuvet, Noruega, 2019-09-07, DD 59.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2020 at 15:44:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Norway
Info View of the popular Geiranger fjord seen from Flydalsjuvet‎, Møre og Romsdal county, Norway. Geiranger fjor is a 15-kilometre (9.3 mi)-long branch off the Sunnylvsfjorden, which is a branch off the Storfjorden (Great Fjord). The c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 15:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support An epic view. No complaints about the exposure on this one. Cmao20 (talk) 15:55, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Some CA (annotated). -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:16, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
KoH: Done, thanks --Poco a poco (talk) 19:48, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support but wish edges were a little sharper. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:53, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:26, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:29, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Epic view indeed. - Benh (talk) 19:15, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 20:22, 1 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 07:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:23, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. Shame about the boat, but you may have arrived on it! Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:32, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 12:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We have very similar existing FP, which is better. —kallerna (talk) 16:10, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

you almost made me change my vote. The framing is better on the current FP, but the candidate has a much bigger size. - Benh (talk) 16:46, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the framing is better on the existing FP, but far too many boats for me. But should we have two very similar FPs of this scene? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:50, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Please, do not display any other files in the nom, the bot will read it an 'Alt'. A link is enough, now fixed. Thank you. --Cart (talk) 18:19, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yes,we have another but ,in my opinion the other one must be delist ... it is very small and this is much better! --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:56, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:03, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose per Kallerna, and no problem with the number of boats in the existing FP. They help the composition. This is a good picture, but it doesn't have a great composition, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose existing FP has imho better light and framing. --Ivar (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vote --Killarnee (T•1•2) 19:30, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 21:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A tough call between this and the existing FP, but I like this more because the colors are a little less lurid, the clouds less busy and the shadows more dramatic here. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The right quarter is quite unsharp --Llez (talk) 16:55, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Spurzem (talk) 17:03, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:D703-056 (39283198830).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 01:41:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1960-1970
Info Israeli P.M. Golda Meir greeting children in Milwaukee, at a school which would later be named after her — October 3, 1969
Info created by RandomUserGuy1738 - uploaded by RandomUserGuy1738 - nominated by Rootless Cosmopolitan -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 01:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 01:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Small and poorly composed - the upper right corner ruins the composition. However, this should be nominated to COM:VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --El Grafo (talk) 08:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose +1.--Peulle (talk) 11:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment image name should be changed. Tomer T (talk) 11:41, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 05:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose fully agree with Ikan. --MB-one (talk) 10:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cascadas Storfossen, Geiranger, Noruega, 2019-09-07, DD 106-108 PAN.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 15:57:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Norway
Info Storfossen Falls, Geiranger‎, Norway. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 15:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 15:57, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A really beautiful place, but the perspective is misleading as it appears to be two flows of water converging on the viewer. I would focus instead in just one direction. I don't think >180-degree panoramas of things which are supposed to be more or less straight lines are appropriate, unless you go full 360 and turn it into a spherical panorama meant to be viewed in a special viewer. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:06, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose yes, it doesn't work at all. ̴̴Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support but I think KoH's point is valid and that it should be mentioned in the image description that the perspective is not quite true to reality. I like the picture though, the composition works well - I especially like the ship peeking out from behind the trees at the left. Cmao20 (talk) 23:25, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Regardless of anything else, not an extraordinary composition to my eyes. It feels to me like it was cropped too low at the top, denying us the view of the top of the tree in the foreground and the relief of seeing some more sky. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 13:37, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 15:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 15:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 15:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

}}

File:Cyclostrema archeri 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 05:52:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Class : Gastropoda
Info I know, this picture is not pixel-sharp. But this is the smallest shell of my collection and one of the smallest gastropod shells of the world. It's size is 0.7 x 0.6 x 0.3 mm, about the size of the dot at the end of this sentence. Created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 05:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support amazing, given the size --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Sonya7iv (talk) 12:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning! -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 14:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC
Support Wowǃ Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:05, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 17:24, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral This one is clearly below the high quality standard of your shell images, but given the small size of it I stick to neutral --Poco a poco (talk) 18:49, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I checked Google Images and could not find a better-quality version, free or non-free. If this is state-of-the-art in what is possible, then it is good enough to be FP IMO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Wow! For an object the size of a full stop, this is extraordinarily detailed, and also very beautiful. Cmao20 (talk) 23:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC) [reply]
Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:05, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:34, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support due to the size of the object. But is this high resolution useful, then, since all the views are quite blurry at full size? I assume 25% of the surface of this image would be far enough to appreciate the visible details as shown -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:45, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This is the original size of the photo. I didn't want to downsize it, but erveryone is free to do it for its own purpose --Llez (talk) 15:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:08, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:52, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 16:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Class : Gastropoda

File:Nymphaea caerulea-20091014-RM-115245.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 06:47:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Nymphaeaceae
Info All by me -- Ermell (talk) 06:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 06:47, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:17, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support From the pre-focus-stacking days! Excellent considering you used F5.6. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:39, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:00, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's nice, but not extraordinary. Seems to be a touch underexposed. —kallerna (talk) 16:12, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:54, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:39, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:16, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support MMmmmmm ... Daniel Case (talk) 04:27, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Spurzem (talk) 17:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:29, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A bit small and a frequent motif but still nicely executed --Poco a poco (talk) 18:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Caltha palustris.JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 14:49:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Ranunculaceae
Info Marsh marigold (Caltha palustris); all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:49, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:49, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not 100% sure I like the big shadow, but still Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:58, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Nice composition, but not sharp and therefore not one of the best photos on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan; light's also a little too harsh. Daniel Case (talk) 18:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bangladesh-Myanmar border 06.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 13:30:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
Info created, uploaded & nominated by RockyMasum -- Rocky Masum (talk) 13:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rocky Masum (talk) 13:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Please eliminate the dust spots above the cloud, mostly on the left side (though a lighter one is above the top of the billow). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:30, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The foreground, midground, and background are too compressed and nondescript, and the image doesn't speak to me as a whole. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:56, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks like a beautiful place, but I'm not quite convinced by the composition. I think there's just too much sky - it would have worked if the sky were a bit more dramatic, but it's fairly featureless. A wider panorama might have worked better here. Cmao20 (talk) 23:57, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't look like one of the best images on Commons.--Peulle (talk) 07:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Undistinguished image of a landscape scene. Daniel Case (talk) 18:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boerengans (Anser anser forma domesticus).19-04-2020 (d.j.b.) 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 15:02:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Anser
Info Domestic goose incubates eggs in mild morning light. Location, nature area De Famberhorst.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:02, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely --Wilfredor (talk) 15:24, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice light on the background, it's a shame that the goose itself is in the shade. —kallerna (talk) 16:14, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It would be a good addition to the relevant gallery. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:48, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:51, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:38, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's the light that makes this work. Cmao20 (talk) 17:45, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:51, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:22, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 17:29, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I don't know, I just don't feel this one. The light on the duck is too much, and the blades of grass a distraction. Daniel Case (talk) 17:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Tricky, lighting, quality and (centered) composition are not at high level for me, but I enjoy the atmosphere and the elements in the picture Poco a poco (talk) 19:11, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I like the goose and have struggled with this vote, but the grasses in front of her distract me and make me feel this is not one of the very best photos on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note; Thanks for your comment. The grass in the photo is inevitable. It is part of the biotope in which the goose breeds. I couldn't approach the goose to cut the grass. Because then she (rightly) flies at you. Nor do I want to disturb nature.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of course I understand that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:58, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Agree the blurry foreground is distracting and the light on the animal not extraordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:01, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ethnographic map of austrian monarchy czoernig 1855.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 15:18:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Maps#Maps_of_Europe
Info Old German-language ethnographic map of the Austrian Empire in 1855 created by Karl Freiherr von Czoernig - uploaded by SamuelHrmel - nominated by Alsakan -- Alsakan (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of the first and best maps of its kind. Definitely in the same class as other old maps that got featured. -- Alsakan (talk) 15:18, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support great (and incredibly useful for historians) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:53, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Martin, this is absolutely fascinating, and it's an old map that has many uses for the modern-day historian of the region. Cmao20 (talk) 00:01, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Would be great if an English translation of the legend were added to the file description. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:05, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have added legend for the colors in the file description corresponding to how they were arranged at the bottom right of the map. Not perfect since I do not have access to software that could determine the exact web colors on a file. Alsakan (talk) 02:45, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love it.--Peulle (talk) 07:12, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Quality is okay, I'd wish a resolution about 4x larger because the smaller text is a bit unsharp and there are very small compression artifacts at pixel niveau, but that's tolerable --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 09:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support nicely digitalised --Grtek (talk) 12:27, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite useful for understanding the history of that region. --Aristeas (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:24, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 16:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the way it looks like it's been folded and refolded a few times, like it was in someone's glove compartment. Daniel Case (talk) 01:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:36, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Pier A Park Hoboken June 2015 panorama 1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2020 at 20:25:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United States
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:25, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:25, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Notable achievement, but not that interesting to look at. Excellent QI/VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:18, 2 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Distracting left part -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:21, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I echo the sentiments above. This is a very strong QI but the skyline doesn't interest me enough for FP. I feel like I'd like to see a wider panorama with more on the right. Cmao20 (talk) 17:48, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically excellent, but the motif is not outstanding, even if it is presented in an appealing light. --Milseburg (talk) 18:33, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I like the row of similar buildings, but it's a shame about the left part. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 19:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others --Cvmontuy (talk) 00:43, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:38, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Great, sorry for the left part. --Aristeas (talk) 13:09, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Kestreltail. -- B2Belgium (talk) 14:51, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The two buildings left look like they would tip backwards and the red spot in the water bothers me. -- Spurzem (talk) 16:57, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan, Cmao, Milseburg. --Isiwal (talk) 18:54, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I want to like it, because it's close to home, and I can forgive the left hand side because I know the area and it would be difficult to not include it without falling into the water, but the composition just feels unbalanced. Daniel Case (talk) 16:36, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:33, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pyrochroa coccinea in Aveyron (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 18:09:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Order : Blattodea (Cockroaches)
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 18:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 18:09, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This image should go to QI first, where I fear it would fail. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The subject itself could fit in a 1000x1000 box, and even then it isn't pixel-sharp. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A valuable picture for the project but the pixel-level sharpness on the insect is not at FP level nowadays. Cmao20 (talk) 23:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:49, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 05:34, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Hausdülmen, Mond über Schmalo -- 2020 -- 6307.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2020 at 07:10:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 07:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay ^talk 07:10, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty and well-composed. Cmao20 (talk) 17:49, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:05, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I don't get it. The trees aren't that distinctive, and while we don't get as many full moons as "sunset on beach" type shots, I just don't see what makes this special in the same vein. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:35, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:14, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King. --Cvmontuy (talk) 00:42, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this atmospheric image. -- Spurzem (talk) 16:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King. --Isiwal (talk) 19:28, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King. We've rejected similar photos that were better. Daniel Case (talk) 16:37, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:10, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Crimea Sentinel-2A MSIL2A 26June2019 843 MM v2.tif, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2020 at 19:22:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images
Info created by contains modified Copernicus Sentinel data (2019), processed by ESA - uploaded and nominated by --Killarnee (T•1•2) 19:22, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 19:22, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question - Is there any way you could convert this to another format, so we could see the image at full size without downloading the file? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:37, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Crimea Sentinel-2A MSIL2A 26June2019 843 MM v2.jpg --Killarnee (T•1•2) 10:46, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Thanks. The size isn't overwhelming, but it's certainly interesting to look at. The shape isn't so obvious as Crimea, though, probably because it shows a limited area of the peninsula, so that we don't see the familiar shape of its coastline. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 12:14, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose don't see anything particularly special about this satellite photo. Other images at Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images depict some event, an identifiable object, or a pleasing composition. This does none of these things. Renata3 (talk) 20:13, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As far as false-color satellite images go, this one is really not all that special. I'd prefer something with an identifiable subject or at least an interesting composition. Compare this to pictures like File:Agriculture in Saudi Arabia ESA344584.jpg, File:Avezzano, Italy ESA346876.jpg, File:Australian crater ESA396041.jpg or File:Berlin ESA344654.jpg from the same Category … --El Grafo (talk) 08:52, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:03, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 05:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support comparing to the other available satellite images, this is one of the very best. --MB-one (talk) 11:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ste Anne Perspective.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2020 at 18:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Isère
Info This natural scene from southern France seems like an FP-level composition to me. Created by MirandaAdramin - uploaded by MirandaAdramin - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 18:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 19:58, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose. Excellent effort, but the composition doesn't quite work for me. The path curves away from the point of interest (the church spire in the background), so the image as a whole doesn't present a cohesive message IMO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:29, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding colours and composition. --Milseburg (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:50, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:28, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wish there were leaves on the trees. Empty road in normal daylight, not FP-material IMO. —kallerna (talk) 04:29, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:36, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. --Fischer.H (talk) 14:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works well for me. Vivid colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 16:11, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful spring picture. -- B2Belgium (talk) 18:26, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Basile --Sonya7iv (talk) 19:19, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile --Aristeas (talk) 10:01, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful: good composition, very good colors, good sharpness. What should be better? -- Spurzem (talk) 16:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support @—kallerna: I'm glad that there are no leaves on the trees. But I fear the climate change will fullfill your wish one day and we will have leaves already much earlier in the year. --Llez (talk) 17:37, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I like it, but the verticals are leaning in. Will support after perspective correction. --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:27, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Kind of per KoH, the elements in the image are good but the compo not convincing, I guess that I'd rather like to see in addition more to the left Poco a poco (talk) 19:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support J'aimerais en voir plus d'œuvre de Mme Rival ... Daniel Case (talk) 21:39, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:37, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per KoH and Poco a poco --GRDN711 (talk) 01:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Maroon Bells (11553)a.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2020 at 02:17:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Colorado
Info Easily one of the most breathtaking scenes I've ever seen in person. FP on enwp for a couple years, and can't remember why I didn't nominate it here. Created/uploaded/nominated by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 02:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 02:17, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The deep arc with the mountains behind it in the background make the picture special. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:24, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:27, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A wonderful landscape, but the sharpness is not outstanding. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:18, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Fischer.H. This is a classic shot, probably the second most well-known view of the Maroon Bells after the Maroon Lake reflection shot, and I'd prefer a bit more technical quality. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:31, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit of CA here and there but the landscape is stunning enough to make this FP. Cmao20 (talk) 15:02, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 15:23, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 17:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's nice, some small problems: the haze, technically only ok, rather dull light, highlights adjusted a tad too much. Goot but not outstanding. Standards for nature pictures like this are quite high. —kallerna (talk) 06:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per kallerna. --GRDN711 (talk) 18:38, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per KoH, nice scenery but the file is indeed pretty small Poco a poco (talk) 19:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, sorry --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support It could be better, and maybe a better one will come along eventually, but for now I'm OK with this as an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 20:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose midday light conditions were imho not special enough, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 04:51, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Taeniopygia bichenovii 2 - Glen Davis.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2020 at 04:52:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Estrildidae_(Estrildid_Finch)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Ivar (talk) 04:52, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 04:52, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:11, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 12:39, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:47, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:28, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:48, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 15:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:58, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 21:16, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 09:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:53, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 00:37, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the soft colors. -- Wolf im Wald 10:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:41, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Macizos de Tennen, Tenneck, Austria, 2019-05-18, DD 28-38 PAN.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2020 at 15:56:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Salzburg
Info View from a trail in the Tennen Mountains towards the Berchtesgaden Alps, Austria. Note: this image is not distorted as you can see in the geodata. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 15:56, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 15:56, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support You weren't very lucky with the light, but the composition and detail are amazing. Cmao20 (talk) 16:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Yes, a great composition. I'm not sure I understand the blue clouds, though. Should they be gray, or did they look blue? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ikan Kekek: I adjusted the WB, it was indeed a bit cold --Poco a poco (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - But what happened to the clouds that disappeared with your edit? Also, the blue mountains in the previous version were nice, though if they were actually gray, fine. Do you think you could recover some of the substance of the clouds (if that's what they were) that disappeared with your edit? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support A very interesting composition --Michielverbeek (talk) 17:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very bad light. Burnt sky, blown highlights, bland colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose light conditions were not favorable. --Ivar (talk) 04:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: having looked at the original version, I'd be more inclined to support it. The sky was partially overexposed, but borderline acceptable for a FP. Now, it's mostly burnt, with strong posterization. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A bit surprised with those who oppose a fisheye shot and support this one. This is more misleading a projection in my opinion. Not careful people will think the two roads are parallel. They aren't. I think there is material for a better projection. The view is very nice (but yes, the lighting could be better; and the exposures on the source photos seem not consistent). - Benh (talk) 17:11, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:12, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Yann (talk) 07:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A place with lots of potential for FP, but this is not it. --El Grafo (talk) 08:26, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 20:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 20:33, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Passing beneath... (44385155311).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2020 at 08:12:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Boats
Info created by Stig Nygaard - uploaded & nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support an interesting picture I found on Flickr. Nice composition conveying the sense of a boat tour. Tomer T (talk) 08:12, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 08:59, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support very nice use of the fisheye for the composition - Benh (talk) 09:35, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh--Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:53, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed, a nice find. Cmao20 (talk) 15:03, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:57, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I dissent. I find the curves too weird and disturbing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:47, 4 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unnatural perspektive due to the very short lens. Further the lighting is not the best. -- Spurzem (talk) 16:45, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting and something different. Would be better without the bridge in the bottom part, but not enough to oppose. —kallerna (talk) 07:01, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For the same reason than here. Looking at these curves, I feel sick, more than if I was on the boat :-) By the way, the name of this file is very bad. COM:I "Images should have a meaningful file name". -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:19, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- You're right it can benefit from a change. The current name is based on the original title in Flickr, which also has some value IMO. But I'll move the image after the FP discussion ends. Tomer T (talk) 11:40, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Find the fish-eye view detracts from rather than adding to the image --GRDN711 (talk) 18:20, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not a big fan of fish-eye lenses in general, but in this case it works very well, imho. --El Grafo (talk) 13:19, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, the fisheye. Daniel Case (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Milseburg (talk) 16:06, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's not the fisheye in general, but the visible part of the bridge on the bottom, that makes it unpleasant to me. --MB-one (talk) 10:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 19:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Black skimmer (Rynchops niger) in flight.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2020 at 16:56:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus : Rynchops (Skimmers)
Info Skimmers are the only birds where the lower mandible (bill) is longer than the upper. It allows them to use their amazing fishing technique. 41 FPs of gulls and terns, but no skimmers. All Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:14, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:26, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Isiwal (talk) 21:14, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:13, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:29, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:40, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good capture and very sharp Cmao20 (talk) 14:19, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:27, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 16:01, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Eye isn't that visible, which is unusual, but of course it's an action picture and quite a beautiful one at that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support stunning. --MB-one (talk) 10:42, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support excellent. --GRDN711 (talk) 15:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not perfect, but it's a tough shot to get and we should be grateful for everything that did go right. Daniel Case (talk) 02:13, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:13, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus : Rynchops (Skimmers)

File:Callospermophilus lateralis near Lake Almanor.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2020 at 15:09:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Order_:_Rodentia_(Rodents)
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:09, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:19, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice portrait of a cutie. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:25, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The rodent specialist. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:41, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment *lol* – actually, this wasn't one of my childhood dreams. However, there's more to come, as I'll be collaborating w/ biologist Achim Raschka on a couple of rodent articles this summer. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:07, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Seven Pandas (talk) 19:03, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:14, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 20:27, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:40, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The food looks like bread.--Ermell (talk) 08:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 09:44, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 12:10, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bob Collowan (talk) 12:51, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely! Cmao20 (talk) 14:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 16:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light, interesting action 🐀 -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:11, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 04:54, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Your making of photo was a good idea. ;-) -- Wolf im Wald 10:44, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Order_:_Rodentia_(Rodents)

File:Casa histórica de Boroujerdi, Kashan, Irán, 2016-09-19, DD 32.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2020 at 20:53:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Iran
Info Interior facade of one of the courtyards of the Borujerdi House, a historic house museum in Kashan, Iran. It was built in 1857 by architect Ustad Ali Maryam for the bride of Borujerdi, a wealthy merchant. The bride came from the affluent Tabātabāei family, for whom the architect had built the nearby Tabātabāei House several years earlier. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 20:53, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:53, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Lines (especially right and bottom) are not straight. If the building itself is crooked, I would suggest not putting those lines so close to the edges of the image where a discrepancy will be obvious; if not, it should be an easily fixable problem in Photoshop. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:04, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
KoH: Done Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:46, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seems FP to me, lots of beautiful detail in high-resolution. Cmao20 (talk) 14:20, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good photo of a very interesting building. — Found two (hard to see) dust spots in the sky, see image notes; please remove them. --Aristeas (talk) 15:29, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Aristeas: Done, thanks Poco a poco (talk) 20:52, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you :–). --Aristeas (talk) 07:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 16:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:25, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Sometimes, "because I want to see this beautiful thing (building in this case) on the front page" is a good enough reason to support (providing it's well photographed, of course). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:15, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:35, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:09, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 06:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:27, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:59, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Matteuccia struthiopteris fiddleheads.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2020 at 23:38:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Onocleaceae
Info: Ostrich fern (Matteuccia struthiopteris) fiddleheads; all by --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:38, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:38, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Really beautifully shaped plants, but the background is a bit distracting for me. I think using a larger aperture and focus-stacking would work wonders. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:18, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The main motif is in focus, the natural background doesn't bother me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:58, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Palauenc05 Cmao20 (talk) 14:21, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Palauenc05 --Aristeas (talk) 13:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! --Sonya7iv (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 04:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 13:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Senden, Venner Moor -- 2020 -- 6669.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2020 at 08:49:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Betulaceae
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 08:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info The photograph was taken early in the morning with the warm light of the sun (golden hour) and the cold light of the shadows (night). --XRay ^talk 08:52, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay ^talk 08:49, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Rootless Cosmopolitan (talk) 00:47, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too busy composition IMO. —kallerna (talk) 07:02, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks like just a normal photo, not one of the very best on Commons.--Peulle (talk) 11:12, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:59, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The technical quality and early morning lighting are appealing. --GRDN711 (talk) 17:33, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice camouflage --Neptuul (talk) 18:50, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The light is special and it definitely made this pic worth taking, but I'm not persuaded that it's interesting enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 23:51, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice interplay of light and dark. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:08, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:31, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:13, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per GRDN711 and King. --Aristeas (talk) 09:52, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. Daniel Case (talk) 05:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same opinion, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 09:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Creator-AP (talk) 13:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It would be nice to see a reason for a contra vote. --XRay ^talk 13:17, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Similarity with The Birch Forest by Gustav Klimt but I don't really like the composition here. Overall it looks too ordinary I think -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nizhny Novgorod Stadium asv2019-05.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2020 at 13:17:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Russia
Info The Nizhny Novgorod Stadium at night. ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 13:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:17, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 13:38, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:02, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:07, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit empty now I suppose Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:08, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support but perhaps the black point could be set a bit lower to give it more punch. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:25, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - That's a really beautiful stadium and an excellent photograph of it. I'm glad you nominated it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:02, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, great capture! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 04:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good time of the day -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The lights are pretty disturbing but not your fault, nice motif, colors and lighting Poco a poco (talk) 09:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support by others. --Aristeas (talk) 13:25, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 23:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 00:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 10:42, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 08:39, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Purple roller (Coracias naevius mosambicus).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2020 at 22:52:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Coraciidae (Rollers)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:52, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:52, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The crop feels a bit too tight IMHO but still a great capture Poco a poco (talk) 09:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support ----The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:10, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose - Fine picture of the bird, but the blurred vegetation in the nearest foreground on the left side really distracts my view, and since this species is classified as "least concern" per Wikipedia, I think you will snap a greater photo of it the next time it's safe to travel to Southern Africa. If it were a rare bird, I would support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:05, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

“Least Concern” is a misleading term, Ikan Kekek. It relates only to the risk of extinction. The porcupine is classified of least concern, but I've never seen one, never mind photographed it. The same applies to practically every tiny mammal, unless they are enticed by food. The purple roller is not a common bird. I've seen a few, but this is the only one I've been able to photograph. Of the five South African rollers, the most common is the lilac roller, with hundreds of good photos and four FPs. You see it every day on safari. It perches in plain sight and does not scare easily. The least common is Coracias spatulatus. I've never seen it. Not a single decent image on Commons. But still classified as ‘of least concern’. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:22, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK. On that basis, I will Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:06, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 00:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice bird, distracting blurry foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Trimeresurus sabahi fucatus, Banded pit viper - Takua Pa District, Phang-nga Province (46710893582).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 04:53:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Viperidae_(Vipers)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by Agathoclea - nominated by Ivar (talk) 04:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 04:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support 🐍 -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:28, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:43, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent, one of Rushenb's best Cmao20 (talk) 23:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:48, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:32, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 10:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 13:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Printmaking Studio (talk) 15:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Viperidae_(Vipers)

File:Brda in Bydgoszcz (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 18:14:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Poland
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 18:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 18:14, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not an extraordinary photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:15, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Subtle, but overall I like it, the pastel shades work really well. Cmao20 (talk) 23:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Pretty, nice atmosphere, but not an extraordinary composition. The trees on the left don't balance out what's on the right side. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - lack of wow, not great composition, the center focus on a blank orange wall. Renata3 (talk) 09:54, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Renata3. --Fischer.H (talk) 13:22, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Both the colours and the composition are OK for me, but a big problem is (as Renata rightly stated) the boring orange wall in the centre. --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing light, bare facade -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 05:10, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gust of wind. Manga..jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 09:03:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Info created by Hokusai. Gust of wind. Manga 5. 1820. - uploaded by Varya.art - nominated by Artcurator Artcurator (talk) 12:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 12:59, 13 May 2020 (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: At only 0.96 Mp it is way below the minimum of 2 Mp. Also poor scanning quality and cut text on both sides. Please read COM:IG. --Cart (talk) 14:10, 13 May 2020 (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.

Support Printmaking Studio (talk) 15:42, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ I guess the FPX is invalid since there has been another support vote. But this is definitely not FP, I'm afraid. It's a great subject, but the resolution is much too low. We won't accept less than 2mpx unless there are very strong mitigating factors, and I don't think there are here. Cmao20 (talk) 17:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose struck per new version. Not sure the quality at full size is the best on Commons, but I would not be unhappy to see this become FP now. Cmao20 (talk) 20:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info New version uploaded. A high resolution 4134 × 3000 (10,36 Мб). Good quality.Artcurator (talk) 18:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll strike the FPX for now, but there is something going on with the file and it keeps reverting to the smaller size. Not sure what you did. You should also add an appropriate gallery as per the original instruction when you created the nomination. It seems you deleted that. Take a look at the instructions on COM:FPC. --Cart (talk) 18:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I'd love to support Hokusai - but both scan and crop just aren't at FP level, sorry --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:09, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Solidus à la victoire sous frappé sous Clovis.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 17:46:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Money_&_Seals
Info Solidus to victory issued under Clovis I (between 491 and 507 CE).
Info created by CGB, uploaded by Lequenne Gwendoline, nominated by Yann (talk) 17:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Given the age, the state of conservation, and the quality of the photograph, it deserves the FP status. -- Yann (talk) 17:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It seems that the cut out has been really poorly executed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry but Oppose per Charles. I agree this is an amazing coin when you consider the age, but the cut-out is very clumsy, and I don't think the image quality is actually that high compared to others in the category - I think there's a bit of red CA going on. Cmao20 (talk) 23:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. --Fischer.H (talk) 13:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp, Cmao20, and Fischer.H: This is a very rare coin, and most probably the best image of it on the whole Internet, let alone a free one. And according to [1], there is an error in the text, which makes it even more special. Yann (talk) 19:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but that diesn't excuse sloppy post-processing which would be really easy to do properly. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Charles. I understand the rarity of the subject and I find it a very interesting object but this is really more of a Valued Images justification than an FP justification. Cmao20 (talk) 22:58, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Artcurator (talk) 11:14, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Artcurator: Not eligible to vote: 50 edits not reached. --A.Savin 12:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles.--Peulle (talk) 11:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Printmaking Studio (talk) 15:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality problem. The cut-out is really poorly done. And for an easy-to-take subject, the right part seems a bit blurry at full resolution (compare with File:Monnaie de Bactriane, Eucratide I, face.jpg for example) -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao and Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 05:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination If anyone has a copy if this coin, could you send it to me so that I can retake the picture? :/ Yann (talk) 11:39, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Erythronium americanum[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 19:38:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Trout lily - anterior view
Trout lily - lateral view

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants#Family_:_Liliaceae
Info: Trout lily (Erythronium americanum); anterior and lateral view. All by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good set. Cmao20 (talk) 23:27, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose good set, but light is sub-optimal. It makes the pictures look very dark and the flower does not visually stand out as it should. Also, second pic has a brown leaf at the bottom that's kinda distracting. Renata3 (talk) 10:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: this is not a plant you'd find in a meadow or even on a forest's edge. Like this plant, it grows under a thick canopy. The photo, taken at noon on a bright spring day, represents light about as optimal as it can get. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:42, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- There are plenty of pics in Category:Erythronium americanum in better light conditions. Renata3 (talk) 23:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - What defines better light, exactly? The subjects are well-lit and stand out against the dark background. I could brighten it, but why would I want it interfering with the subject? --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose pre Renata3 --GRDN711 (talk) 00:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:55, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Renata3. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Creator-AP (talk) 13:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Renata. Daniel Case (talk) 05:59, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:50, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pier, Eckernförde (P1100610).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 10:30:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Germany
Info all by MB-one -- MB-one (talk) 10:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MB-one (talk) 10:30, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:08, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Simple but very nice. The uneven bar in the middle adds dynamism. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per KoH, I'm not sure it would actually work without that. Excellent composition Cmao20 (talk) 23:19, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - It's interesting that the angle of this shot gives me an odd sense of claustrophobia, but that's neither here nor there. Very good composition, and the fact that the pier is partly dismantled helps make it stand out, compared to similar pictures. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per King of Hearts. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:09, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:03, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Eye-catching perspective -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:47, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 20:07, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perspective actually works better with the softer light. Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:16, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Treppenhaus im Nordturm von Schloss Drachenburg.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 08:00:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info created & uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:00, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Particularly nice staircase picture because of the starry sky on top. Good find, Tomer T! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is there a way to tilt it cw, that slight tilt is kind of disturbing, otherwise a nice motif and well executed Poco a poco (talk) 09:43, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support absolutely per Ikan, I like this very much Cmao20 (talk) 23:05, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:52, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 10:26, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:44, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. -- Wolf im Wald 10:40, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:25, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:34, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Please have a look to the CAs at the window at the right. Please remove the CAs. --XRay ^talk 05:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Printmaking Studio (talk) 15:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 17:12, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Dlieja de San Antone dovia cun nubles Urtijëi.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 15:13:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Italy
Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 15:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 15:13, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The composition is great and the clouds are lovely, but I can't get over the fact that the main subject is in shadow. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:17, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It came out well for a tricky backlit scenario. The mackerel sky is what makes it work. Cmao20 (talk) 00:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:59, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but that looks ~~completely~~ a bit overcooked to me. --El Grafo (talk) 08:53, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - I know what that means when I'm eating something, but what does it mean in this case? Some type of overprocessing? What are you seeing? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:57, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Apologies: yes, I meant overprocessed, although I'm realizing that that doesn't really fit either. With a backlit scene like this, you would normally either have the sky over-exposed or the subject under-exposed (possibly both). There are ways to overcome this, the most common one probably being merging multiple exposures into an HDR image and then tone-mapping them back in to a regular LDR image that can be displayed on a normal monitor. Depending on how you do that, it can look quite natural, painterly hyperrealistic or like you're on some kind of trip - the latter one or two (depending on how you like your HDR) often being called "overcooked". Upon closer inspection, it appears that here a simpler approach was chosen, where the over-exposed sky was replaced with a well-exposed one. There's nothing wrong with that in principle, it just doesn't look convincingly realistic to me in this case. The clouds feel too dark in relation to the rest of the scene. The contrast between shadows and direct sunlight in the foreground feels too flat to me. For instance, I'd intuitively expect the "white" stripes on the house on the right to be much closer to actual white/clipping than they currently are. --El Grafo (talk) 13:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. Thanks for explaining that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:25, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The main subject is in shadow. —kallerna (talk) 12:06, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per El Grafo --Andrei (talk) 10:31, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The light is not working for me -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The fact, that the church is in the shadow makes it more special for me. There's a tiny bit of chroma nois in full res, but apart from that it's beautiful. --MB-one (talk) 10:46, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Light's not right and the background's distracting, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 01:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers. --Ivar (talk) 04:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 13:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 12:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eva Le Gallienne (mnwp.275003, cropped restoration).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 15:32:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Nicholas Haz - restored, uploaded and nominated by Coffeeandcrumbs --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 15:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 15:32, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:02, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm not happy with how much she's in shadow. Leaning toward opposing, but I'd welcome an argument. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:50, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I noticed that too. When shooting a portrait, it is important to set up good lighting. In this case I think the photographer blew it. --Peulle (talk) 07:10, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nah, lighting is alright – that's pretty much a soft en:Rembrandt lighting. But it is rather dark over-all. Based on how the the original looks like, I'd say it was scanned very conservatively so as to not blow out the highlights in the digital version. Note that the plain white border of unexposed photographic paper is represented as grey here (about 225,225,225 in RGB or 75% lightness in HSL). That makes sense for archiving, but is very likely not a faithful digital representation of the original print in terms of viewer impression. Raising the exposure a bit so that most of the border (but not the background) is clipping makes it much more friendly. But still, in the end it is just a reasonably well done formal portrait of a reasonably well-known person. A good candidate for COM:VI, possibly a good candidate for FP at en.wikipedia, but it really doesn't have the WOW I'd expect from a Commons FP. Sorry, but I'm still gonna have to Oppose. --El Grafo (talk) 08:37, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - In neither of the works by Rembrandt given as reproductions in the linked article does he give one of the brightest spots to a random area on the upper left corner of the picture. Instead, the backgrounds are dark to black. So I don't think this is a good example of emulating Rembrandt. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek I have made a small adjustment to the exposure. You can see the characteristic triangle under her left eye a little bit more. I think El Grafo is right. The intent was must have been some sort of en:Rembrandt lighting. --- C&C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 10:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's all about the subject, background doesn't really play any role in how you classify basic portrait lighting (). The important point here is the triangle of light on the darker side of the face. Also, it's a photography/cinematography term, not an arts/painting term afaik. Despite the name, Rembrandt is not really the reference here. Some random references: [2], [3], [4]. The lack of photographic examples in the article is weird, I'll see if I can fix that – maybe eve with this one ... --El Grafo (talk) 11:36, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see. However, having part of the background be distractingly brighter than the face seems like a bad practice to me. I will Oppose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:55, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Can't disagree with that. Meanwhile: Wikipedia article updated with some actual photographs ... --El Grafo (talk) 12:24, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support The look in her eyes is so intense and captivating that I'm not distracted by the shadow. Daniel Case (talk) 14:18, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 12:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Katholische Pfarrkirche St. Julitta und Quiricus, Andiast. (actm) 06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2020 at 23:48:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows
Info I like this picture both because I think it's a really beautiful stained glass window, and because it's very well captured. A lot of other FPs in the stained glass window category have too much contrast and saturation, leading to unrealistically bright and contrasty colours against a pitch-black background. This is much more subtly and sensitively done. created by Agnes Monkelbaan - uploaded by Agnes Monkelbaan - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:48, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:48, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:58, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Don't know when this was done, but the glass painter Oskar Berbig was active in 1914. ̴̴̃Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:55, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:38, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 14:00, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much for nominating my photo.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:52, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:48, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perhaps you should add "The Immaculate Heart of Mary" to the description. --Llez (talk) 05:26, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 08:56, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very well captured, but artistically not appealing to me --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:23, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:42, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:54, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:17, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 14:22, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 12:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Single stained glass windows

File:Ratoh Jaroe Dance.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 13:41:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by Gerdie Hutomo Nurhadi - uploaded by Gerdie Hutomo Nurhadi - nominated by Mimihitam -- Mimihitam (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mimihitam (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much noise given the resolution. Nice picture nevertheless. --Yann (talk) 15:41, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose They shouldn't be grinning at the camera. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:48, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Yann. The composition is really good here and I think it would pass QI, but I do think it's too noisy considering the relatively small size. Cmao20 (talk) 23:23, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This could have been great, but Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:53, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 00:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 12:33, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:AuschwitzBirkenau 13.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2020 at 10:28:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Other#Poland
Info created by Pankrzysztoff - uploaded by Pankrzysztoff - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 10:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 10:28, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose. Amazing composition, but with only the middle ground in focus it just looks off. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:26, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King. I also think a longer depth of field would get the horror across more. Good up to full page on my 13-inch laptop, but I'd like it to be more in focus at a larger size for FP. QI easily - should be nominated at QIC. Also could be a useful VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:05, 10 May 2020(UTC)
Support The DoF doesn't bug me here. --MB-one (talk) 10:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Good composition but the DoF is IMO too shallow. Cmao20 (talk) 23:02, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Good composition and colours. For me, personally, the DoF is not that bad, but I wish it would have been either longer or even more shallow. --Aristeas (talk) 10:45, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers. --Ivar (talk) 04:56, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just too much unsharp. I also think it's too wide ... see note for how I'd crop it on a reshoot. Daniel Case (talk) 20:49, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Andrei (talk) 10:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wroclaw- Plac Kosciuszki.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2020 at 10:30:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Poland
Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 10:30, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 10:30, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Someone really needs to review this, so here goes. I'm not sure how unusual it is, but I like the off-centre composition and I think it conveys the busy nature of the city. Cmao20 (talk) 16:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Experimental maybe but I don't find the result very striking. I miss something special here in addition to these light trails -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:41, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting idea but it just doesn't make it as an FP ... it's very busy, and you've got things like the light gantry sticking in from the right and that pole with the top cropped in the center. Plus the short light trails seem a little strange as well ... it would look at least a little better with longer ones. Daniel Case (talk) 15:45, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:19, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! --Podzemnik (talk) 11:04, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 13:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lighttrails photo could be very good and interesting, but you need longer exposure time. Various short light trails and blurry, yet visible, vehicles is not good enough for FP imo. Commons have many light trail photos, and the photo here is far from one of the best. Here are some FP we have 1 2 3 4.--ArildV (talk) 06:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Andrei (talk) 10:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:KIFS OpenCL 8K HQ 20200503 13m 8,3s.png, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2020 at 08:56:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

$Fractal image showing different mathematical phenomena (concept about infinities, symmetry, fractal geometry, ....) and$

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Other
Info Fractal image showing different mathematical phenomena (concept about infinities, symmetry, fractal geometry, ...). In short, the image visualizes the fractal property of infinity via showing an infinite number of lines in the image. Created/uploaded/nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 08:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 08:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Sorry to vote first again, but as I've been awake a lot at night, at home and unemployed (but otherwise well and doing fine), I'm spending a lot of time online. Anyway, this is beautiful and I feel impelled to support it now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:46, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. If this were a photo I would have called the bottom sliver distracting and asked for a crop, but it works here because as a mathematical image it is useful for implying the continuation of the fractal down below. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per KoH. Cmao20 (talk) 16:18, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cbrescia (talk) 21:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:13, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:36, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:45, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very special --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:15, 8 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Other

File:Chinese Water Dragon (Physignathus cocincinus) - Khao Yai National Park - 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 08:48:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Agamidae_(Dragon_Lizards)
Info created & uploaded by Rushenb - nominated by Ivar (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Crop is a bit tight on the left, otherwise no obvious flaws here and another sharp and well-composed photo from this author. Cmao20 (talk) 13:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No obvious flaws? low POV, over-exposed/white background, damaged tail, overall sharpness, branch top right corner. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:30, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charlesjsharp: overexposed, low POV and it seems to me the white balance is off. --Dinkum (talk) 20:43, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 11:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Welte, Rhododendronwald -- 2020 -- 6904.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 05:01:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Ericaceae
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 05:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay ^talk 05:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --beautiful--Kathy※(留言) 08:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Not eligible to vote. --A.Savin 12:38, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice, but a bit too much is out of focus to me. It might be better if you crop it a bit more closely to centre on the in-focus areas - perhaps a vertical crop? Cmao20 (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your suggestion. Yes, sometimes it is good to have a lot of sharpness. But in this case it's OK for me to have an unsharp background. It gives an impression of the forest. --XRay ^talk 17:45, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose Cluttered background in my view. -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:21, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good for me. --Aristeas (talk) 14:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --MB-one (talk) 17:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:12, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 05:21, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thank you for your reviews. --XRay ^talk 06:01, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /XRay ^talk 06:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nilgans, Schlosspark Biebrich, 170414, ako.jpg not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 23:58:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Alopochen
Info This seems like a very good bird picture to me. I don't mind (actually quite like) the slight motion blur on the bird's leg as it helps convey movement and dynamism, but I don't know if you'll agree. created by Code - uploaded by Code - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not just the legs, unfortunately; the whole bird - which is so common - has little definition. Also, background and lighting. ̴̴Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:57, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It may be common, but just to point out that there is only one other FP and it's a head-only shot that doesn't match up to this in quality. Not sure I see a problem with the lighting. Is it too bright for you? Cmao20 (talk) 14:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The light is behind the bird. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:08, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Charles here Poco a poco (talk) 12:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charlesjsharp. --Fischer.H (talk) 08:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles --El Grafo (talk) 09:41, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:49, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination This looks like a non-starter, unfortunately. Cmao20 (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Astronotus ocellatus - Karlsruhe Zoo 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2020 at 09:52:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family : Cichlidae (Cichlids)
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:52, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 12:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:28, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:30, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:21, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 15:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 16:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:15, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 17:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:56, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:13, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 17:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:37, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish#Family : Cichlidae (Cichlids)

File:Mount Rushmore detail view.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2020 at 20:41:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues outdoors
Info Please notice that the image cannot be displayed regularly in the browser due to the high resolution of 612 megapixels. However, the image can be downloaded or viewed in the ZoomViewer. There is also a reduced version with only 100 megapixels, which can be viewed in the browser as usual. Created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Wolf im Wald 20:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 20:41, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know about the technology, but the result seems pretty incredible. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Thank you! It's a stitched image out of 187 single images. I took them with a focal length of 600mm (prime lens) on my Canon EOS 5DS (full frame). The stitched image has a full resolution of 1448 megapixels, but I had to scale it down for computer performance reasons and because of the 30.000 x 30.000 pixels limitation of the JPEG format. Because of the extreme conditions (heated air flow) not every single image is perfectly sharp, so that I besides improved the overall sharpness with this downscaling. -- Wolf im Wald 01:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Amazing! --Sonya7iv (talk) 21:21, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Utterly incredible. Cmao20 (talk) 22:33, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unbelievable quality. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. Stupefying! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition, outstanding resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:43, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:22, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 08:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitly great ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 10:01, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice big mosaic. And even good framing and light on top. - Benh (talk) 11:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:14, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Seven Pandas (talk) 20:03, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:11, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitely one of the very best images on Commons. POTY candidate 2020.--Peulle (talk) 10:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:31, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Die Auflösung ist abartig. Ich liebe es! --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:39, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Absolutely flawless. --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:56, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 17:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:36, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Wandeling over het Hulshorsterzand-Hulshorsterheide 07-03-2020. (d.j.b) 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2020 at 15:43:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Pinaceae
Info Hulshorsterzand/Hulshorsterheide. Solitaire Pinus sylvestris. The sun shines on the dark threatening clouds.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 16:31, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like the big tree is reaching towards the little tree. Great atmosphere. You may want to reduce the noise in the sky slightly. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 16:51, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Noise Reduction Thank you for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:49, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:00, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:07, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 13:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:17, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:35, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Drosophilidae Crocosmia-20190802-RM-091547.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 08:40:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera
InfoDew fly on the top of a Montbretien blossom in a garden of Bamberg. Focus stack of 17 frames. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 08:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 08:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question - Is "Unidentified Drosophilidae" OK for FP, or should we have an identification of the species first? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with Ikan, a clear FP to me if identified Poco a poco (talk) 09:35, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm asking a question, not giving an answer. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Does anyone know this fly? I have searched for a long time and found no answer. I couldn't find a unique category either.--Ermell (talk) 12:50, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Drosophilidae is specfic enough for me and the image is just excellent. --MB-one (talk) 10:34, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 12:31, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support ----The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 15:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 18:16, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Can you identify it Ermell? I would support then. ̴̴Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:51, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info I am still trying to find out.--Ermell (talk) 22:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding focus-stack again Cmao20 (talk) 23:18, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:19, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:55, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:46, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support How did you make the fly immobile to take the 17 shots for stacking? --Llez (talk) 15:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Actually I just wanted to photograph the blossom but then the fly was coming along. It should not be too windy for stacking images.--Ermell (talk) 22:13, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question @Ermell: can u enlighten me a little? I'm doing mean/median stacking. I guess it's the same principle. There's a pre stage which consists in aligning the pictures (because in my case, the pictures are taken from a slightly moving drone). So my question is: if the leaves move very slightly, your process/pipeline will align everything right. Am I correct? Thanks - Benh (talk) 09:57, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment No, I'll have to rework it by hand. The less the object has moved the better. Still air is ideal and I always use a tripod. That is certainly difficult with a drone.--Ermell (talk) 10:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. And it's actually not so hard to realign drone shots as long as the drone stays still enough (obviously) and it's high enough to minimize parallax errors. - Benh (talk) 06:52, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Helicon Soft aligns my hand-held/monopod-supported images quite well. If I have moved sideways too much, then I align and crop manually getting it as close as I can then the software can usually cope. You need to make sure there's only one 'in focus' insect or whatever in the frame so that the software doesn't get confused. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:29, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Reminds me Richard Bartz at his best. Gorgeous composition and light. - Benh (talk) 20:15, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 00:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing quality, and the species seems identified now. Well done -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:27, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info I am now pretty sure that it is this fly, especially since the picture was taken directly under a cherry tree.--Ermell (talk) 22:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure, Ermell? None of the images I can find on the Internet have the same dark marks on the abdomen. And the eye seems different. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:36, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have asked the experts at Wikipedia but have not yet received an answer. If someone knows better, you can always change that.--Ermell (talk) 21:37, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Can we keep the discussion open. Shouldn't promote with possible error in id. Sorry Ermell, I can't think of any other way to delay promotion other than temporary oppose.Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:56, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Quite rightly it's going to be promoted Ermell, and if you remove species name, I will remove oppose vote. ̴̴ Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:15, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well Charlesjsharp, I will reset the category to unidentified. Maybe one will appear in my garden again this year and then I will have a closer look again.--Ermell (talk) 19:27, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ivar (talk) 04:57, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:04, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive. -- Wolf im Wald 10:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:39, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Never actually seen one of these outside a lab ... Daniel Case (talk) 14:46, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:59, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 17:11, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:13, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Falaises d'Amont.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2020 at 13:23:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Normandy
Info Cliffed coast at Étretat, France, seen from the offshore wave cut platform. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 13:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 13:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:32, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Artcurator (talk) 11:10, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Artcurator: Not eligible to vote: 50 edits not reached. --A.Savin 12:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SupportColumbb (talk) 17:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:01, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Boklm (talk) 17:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:42, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:11, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Aragonite crystal - Los Molinillos, Ceunca, Spain - 4x3.6x3.5cm 100g.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 05:35:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Ivar (talk) 05:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 05:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 13:00, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great, I'm enjoying this series of minerals from JJ Harrison. Very sharp and beautiful. Cmao20 (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:30, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:11, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:34, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 14:30, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals

File:Fishing Vessel Marna of Faaborg, Denmark.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2020 at 12:48:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Boats
Info created by N.H. Fischer - uploaded by N.H. Fischer - nominated by Bob Collowan -- Bob Collowan (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bob Collowan (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good light but the content is not very striking, and the sharpness at full resolution rather low -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:25, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the rigging is not clearly eonough separated from the background for my taste. --MB-one (talk) 10:38, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty good for me. Sharpness is OK and the composition and light are nice. Cmao20 (talk) 23:03, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Even cropped in from the sides on the boat, it's still a pretty standard QI of a boat. Daniel Case (talk) 20:53, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Glyphoglossus molossus, Blunt-headed burrowing frog - Mueang Loei District, Loei Province (47097003944).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 09:03:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Family : Microhylidae (Narrow-Mouthed Frogs)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by B2Belgium - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This has been on my nomination list for a long time. -- B2Belgium (talk) 10:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the reflections should be better managed with a 'studio' type shot like this. ̴̃Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Artcurator (talk) 11:08, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Artcurator: Not eligible to vote: 50 edits not reached. --A.Savin 12:36, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 12:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ugly but almost cute. Cmao20 (talk) 17:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
SupportColumbb (talk) 17:23, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 17:55, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fat one 🐸 Basile Morin (talk) 00:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:31, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:46, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support croak --Aristeas (talk) 14:22, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas Poco a poco (talk) 18:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent quality.--Peulle (talk) 08:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 20:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Andrei (talk) 19:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:14, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians#Family : Microhylidae (Narrow-Mouthed Frogs)

File:Palacio de Golestán, Teherán, Irán, 2016-09-17, DD 07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2020 at 23:24:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Iran
Info I was browsing Poco's Iranian pictures after enjoying his current nom, and this one also seems FP quality to me. created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:24, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:05, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 18:35, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nom, Cmao20! Poco a poco (talk) 20:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:26, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Berthold Werner (talk) 11:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:57, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Tartu Püssirohukelder 03.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 12:50:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Estonia
Info created by Lauri Veerde - uploaded & nominated by Kruusamägi (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Pub with the highest ceiling in the world. Kruusamägi (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kruusamägi (talk) 12:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A short English description (which mentions what this room was originally built for) and a geolocation (coordinates) would be useful additions to the image description page ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 15:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks! Kruusamägi (talk) 16:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 14:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Brilliant! Really interesting place and the resolution is super-high. Cmao20 (talk) 17:09, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:27, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Interesting place but really distorted foreground. Which angle is it? Which camera? {{Panorama}} added. -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Under the circumstances, however, I find it well solved.--Ermell (talk) 06:54, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support By all means! --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ermell. --Aristeas (talk) 14:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is it possible to get rid of the CA? Poco a poco (talk) 17:55, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 22:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:15, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Wolfsspinne Trochosa Rose-20190905-RM-081613.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 09:02:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Lycosidae (Wolf Spiders)
Info Wolf Spider (Pardosa hortensis) between the leaves of a rose blossom in a garden in Bamberg. Focus stack of 19 images. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 09:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 09:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The orientation isn't ideal - may be could be changed? - and it doesn't seem as sharp as usual. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info I adjusted the crop a little bit and sharpened it a bit.--Ermell (talk) 21:49, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Printmaking Studio (talk) 15:28, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think what Charles is seeing is noise, not unsharpness. But nothing like enough to spoil my enjoyment of yet another superb focus stack. Cmao20 (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

unsharpness, but not really bad. The orientation is the issue that could be rectified. The spider is at an awkward angle. ̴̴Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:29, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:51, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fresh and technically very nice. But the spider would look better if the image was inclined 30 degrees CW (not sure it's possible) -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:25, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info I was thinking the same thing. But the camera was exactly aligned and so the spider sat on the leaf. Whenever I adjust such pictures it does not look natural because the light conditions change.--Ermell (talk) 06:58, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I know what you mean, but I tried it and it looked fine. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:05, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 17:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 14:30, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:43, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:13, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Lycosidae (Wolf Spiders)

File:Smiling cow in the Brazilian Northeast.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 01:26:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
Info all by -- Wilfredor (talk) 01:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support: boop! --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp enough for a FP --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:20, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not technically perfect but a nice, special pic that raises a smile Cmao20 (talk) 23:04, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao20 --Llez (talk) 14:59, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tongue out or special feature missing. Indistinct eyes and neck. The strong shadows interfere with the black coating, resulting in obscured areas. Misplaced ears. And the wall behind is very ugly -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:13, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:16, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:01, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bamberg Hain Boot 130386.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2020 at 15:33:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Boats
Info A tremendously colourful autumn photo, and hopefully a solid FP. Created by Ermell - uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:33, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the colors and the mood but the composition doesn't work for me. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IMO the reflection is not sharp enough for FP --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:54, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination IMO a real shame. Just goes to show I'm sometimes terrible at predicting the kind of photos that will do well. Cmao20 (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common kingfisher (Alcedo atthis ispida) female with dragonfly larva.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2020 at 08:30:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Alcedinidae (Kingfishers)
Info Kingfishers usually fish for fish, but this is tricky if you live on the Great Hungarian Plain. The Danube runs through the plain, but it is fast-flowing and is the most polluted river in Europe. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:19, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 17:01, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support rare shot and excellently captured. --MB-one (talk) 17:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support amazing light! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:13, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 06:21, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Martin. Cmao20 (talk) 13:45, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:00, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Beautiful -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per MB-one and Martin. --Aristeas (talk) 13:23, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:16, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice. possible to get a category for the ~~food~~ insect? — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:39, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:40, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Curral das Freiras from Eira do Serrado 06.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 12:37:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Portugal
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 12:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 12:37, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The bottom left corner? Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:55, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- The parapet of the lookout --Llez (talk) 14:13, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I was meaning it would have to goǃ Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:45, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - I cropped it out --Llez (talk) 16:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:40, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Immense resolution and plenty of good details but I find it a bit washed out on the left-hand side, and I'm not 100% sure about the composition. I like my panoramas to be wide, sweeping and give a sense of the vastness of the landscape; this is a great shot but it's a bit too short-and-fat rather than long-and-thin for me, if that makes any sense. Cmao20 (talk) 23:21, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Could be sharper at the bottom left, and the left and middle area could be a little brighter. This makes the photo look a little gloomy. But I like this kind of panoramas, so a "Pro" -- Je-str (talk) 09:24, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a good picture, but no wow recognizable. --Fischer.H (talk) 13:43, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much is dark, dull colors at the left with blue hint -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Printmaking Studio (talk) 15:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 19:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:54, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:39, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wernigerode Brocken.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 09:47:00 (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 Vincent Eisfeld -- Vincent Eisfeld (talk) 09:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Vincent Eisfeld (talk) 09:47, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but I'm not seeing one of the best images on Commons here. It is tilted, dark, and the scene itself is just OK, not extraordinary.--Peulle (talk) 11:36, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This would work for me if the lady in the foreground were sharp, but she's completely blurred and that spoils it for me. I see what you were going for and I actually like the dark mood, it's quite atmospheric, but I think you needed to use a narrower aperture to get everything in focus. Cmao20 (talk) 13:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overall dark, and the lady is totally out of focus -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:17, 16 May 2020 (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 --Milseburg (talk) 14:27, 18 May 2020 (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:David Raju Leopard 3457 (cropped).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 13:32:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
Info created by Davidvraju - uploaded by Davidvraju - nominated and modified by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:32, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This image is very good, but IMO might benefit from a little tighter cropping (marked in note) to increase the wow factor – your call on that. It would also benefit from location information written into the description, as well as GPS coordinates if possible. --GRDN711 (talk) 15:26, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sure! Yann (talk) 15:42, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose David is one of India's top guides, but this is not of a high enough technical standard. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A really nice capture but the technical quality is not the highest. Cmao20 (talk) 23:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The background is pretty, but there's too much of it and not enough of the leopards, who should be larger in the screen. Mainly, though, as stated above, this is below the standard of sharpness and detail set by Charles and others at FPC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:56, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good but not exceptional recording. --Fischer.H (talk) 13:40, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creator-AP (talk) 13:02, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the subdued colors more than I'd expect myself to, but regardless of them the background is just too much of a distraction. Daniel Case (talk) 00:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow! Tomer T (talk) 16:38, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Mangosteen1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2020 at 22:22:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits (raw)
Info created by Monfie - uploaded by Monfie - nominated by Monfie -- Monfie (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Monfie (talk) 22:22, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice, but the white background has a bit of a magenta cast. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:39, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - A reflection of the fruit? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but I would expect some minor correction. For example, if you photograph a bird in a dense forest, the WB is going to naturally be very green, but our goal is not to preserve that but dial it back somewhat. Having the paper lean slightly in the magenta direction is appropriate and expected; it's just too much here IMO. If a correction would rob the mangosteens of their color, the correct thing to do is to increase the saturation afterwards. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:25, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - In these situations, is the white balance off, or is the correction changing things to look different from reality? I ask because I don't know how you're thinking about it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:36, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There is no such thing as reality, only what looks natural. If you stay in the woods for long enough, your eyes naturally cover the scene in a magenta veneer, but the camera sensor is not stateful. If we always wanted to capture the "reality" of whatever the sensor saw, then why do we even have WB controls? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:01, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basically, I meant what it would look like to you while you were there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:29, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Our eyes are really powerful devices. They can see something as white even though it clearly have a tint because they compare it to its surroundings (see w:The dress for an example of this phenomenon, i.e. colors only exist in our eyes relative to other colors). But when we look at a screen, any color cast hits us in the face because we compare it against the rest of the screen which we take as our definition of true white. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:07, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, interesting. By the way, that dress is obviously blue with black stripes. I don't understand how someone with normal color perception could see it as white and gold - that's crazy to me! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:17, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support The one on the right has been cut open? Adds more illustrative value, I guess. Nice use of depth of field, the nearest ones are perfectly sharp and the background ones properly blurred. Overall I agree this is one of our best shots in the food-and-drink category, well done. Cmao20 (talk) 23:29, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Yes, it's open. Mangosteen is one of my favorite fruits, and I'd love to be eating one now! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 10 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose a good recording, but no FP. --Fischer.H (talk) 07:50, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not up to our other still lifes of fruits. Daniel Case (talk) 16:30, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 09:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Swidnica- Kosciol Pokoju- sufit.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2020 at 01:50:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Poland
Info created & uploaded by User:Jar.ciurus - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Amazing ceiling and a great photo; I hope you don't find defects I overlooked, but this really wows me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:50, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The subject is amazing indeed. The main defect to me is that the highlights are not controlled very well, the windows are too bright and the glare washes out the areas around them and produces a blue colour cast. Cmao20 (talk) 16:30, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I noticed that but think it's a minor issue. Maybe not, and it could be that the blue cast reads as chromatic aberration that bothers all the people who have declined comment. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:27, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support was going to nominate it :) --Andrei (talk) 20:17, 11 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

;-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:18, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Gnosis (talk) 05:31, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:32, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice motif but the blue CA around the windows should be removed IMHO given that some windows are burnt Poco a poco (talk) 18:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The photographer hasn't been on Commons for some time, so I'm not hopeful s/he'll be back to make any edits. By the way, my computer isn't booting, so I'm working from my iPhone and won't be voting for any pictures for the time being. I also don't see how to get into the history of the nomination page to thank anyone: Daniel, consider yourself thanked. You too, Poco. Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 05:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:56, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 09:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Antoniuskirche, Frankfurt, Nave 20150820 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 12:58:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info c/u/n -- DXR (talk) 12:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- DXR (talk) 12:58, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice geometric structure. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:19, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This was on my list to nominate, your church interiors are consistently very good and this is no exception. Cmao20 (talk) 13:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think that the image is slightly underexposed and when you tried not to overexpose the stained glass you ended up underexposing the ceiling and sides under the arches. Additionally there is a lack of contrast and texture on some surfaces due to poor lighting. Finally the left side seems to have a perspective inclination to the left and this is mainly visible in the central upper arch. --Wilfredor (talk) 18:52, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It is a dark church and as you can see, most of the lights are switched off, so I think the representation is rather faithful to reality. Generally, I would rather say that there is a tendency to display gloomy places like church interiors brighter than they are. Regarding the perspective, I would think that it is fine, even though I understand that very wide angle pictures sometimes appear to be slightly off. --DXR (talk) 10:53, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done. I also think that the brightness is good and realistic (AFAIK remember from a visit to that church). --Aristeas (talk) 13:28, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:03, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:18, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:34, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 20:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 17:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sacred ibis (Threskiornis aethiopicus).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 16:50:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Threskiornis
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice job --Sonya7iv (talk) 17:49, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:27, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Poco a poco (talk) 07:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. But the framing could be tighter (uninteresting sky) -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, but I like it that the eye is precisely on the rule of thirds on both axes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:45, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:30, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:07, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:19, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Frankfurter Altstadt mit Skyline 2019.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2020 at 10:32:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany
Info This picture is stitched out of 105 single images. I took them with a focal length of 135mm on my Canon EOS 5DS R. Created, uploaded and nominated by me -- Wolf im Wald 10:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 10:32, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful colors. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:23, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Technically outstanding. For a look at the entire new build old town, the perspective should have been directed a bit further down. --Milseburg (talk) 13:35, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

There was a building site 'further down', not old town, so I assume there are new buildings there now. ̴̴Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:26, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The city of Frankfurt rebuilt there a few years ago historic buildings that were destroyed in WW2. But at the modern building in the upper left corner of this image was an ugly scaffold, so that I cut it off at the roof. -- Wolf im Wald 14:26, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:34, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Again, an immense effort and an excellent result. Cmao20 (talk) 16:29, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good total impression of Frankfurt, I only miss the river --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:20, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! -- B2Belgium (talk) 21:00, 12 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:06, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:53, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:12, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high technical quality. --Peulle (talk) 10:25, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good light and exceptional resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:16, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As a skyscraper fan, I wish we had more architecture FPs on Commons, but unfortunately I don't consider this to be an extraordinary skyline shot, even though it may be technically excellent. Perhaps I'm jaded after having seen so many Frankfurt photos; in any case, I'll be happy if this does get promoted. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfect! --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:48, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:39, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:10, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Piotr Bart (talk) 07:44, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ski dans le Queyras.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 17:05:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual_snow_sports
Info created by Boklm - uploaded by Vokkevwup - nominated by Boklm -- Boklm (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Boklm (talk) 17:05, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too noisy, even no QI for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:48, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michiel. --Basotxerri (talk) 09:25, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Noisy and I don't like the post-treatment -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:09, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other--A ^(talk) 20:03, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 05:28, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:08, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aleksander Gierymski - Jewish woman selling oranges - Google Art Project.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2020 at 17:59:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Paintings
Info created by Aleksander Gierymski - uploaded by Artinpl/Google Art Project/MNW - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 17:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. One of the most popular Polish paintings, according to google. Beautiful details, amazing history. -- Andrei (talk) 17:59, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very detailed photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:47, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 10:18, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 14:54, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes to more paintings. :)--Peulle (talk) 11:12, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:32, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:16, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:32, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Eisriesenwelt, Macizos de Tennen, Austria, 2019-05-18, DD 58.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2020 at 13:20:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Salzburg
Info View of the Berchtesgaden Alps from the entrance of the Eisriesenwelt cave, Salzburg, Austria. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 13:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:20, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Superb, very sharp and a nice 'natural frame'. IMO one of the best of your recent photos. Cmao20 (talk) 14:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love this. --T.Bednarz (talk) 15:02, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love this too --Sonya7iv (talk) 16:40, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, beautiful photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:48, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:13, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:23, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 08:06, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:39, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a very good one. --Milseburg (talk) 14:35, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:29, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:16, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Karhu-Korhosen kirjasto, Lemmenjoki National Park, Inari (August 2019, 2).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2020 at 20:12:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Finland
Info Karhu-Korhonen library in Lemmenjoki National Park in Inari, Finland. This small library is located in a former airstrip service building on top of a fell and is probably the most remote library in Finland. A photograph by me. --Msaynevirta (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Msaynevirta (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This library may be important or interesting because of its remote location but I don't find that the image itself is interesting or special enough to be a Featured Picture. --Basotxerri (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I incline to agree with the above. Good QI but not an outstanding composition for FP Cmao20 (talk) 14:54, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not special enough, just looks like a random shed. To make it work, I think the pic should show the remoteness -- zoom out and show the nothing around it. Ala the house on Elliðaey. Renata3 (talk) 21:16, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 04:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:18, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Les Grandes Jorasses - 1111.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2020 at 20:50:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Haute-Savoie
Info created by Boklm - uploaded by Vokkevwup - nominated by Boklm -- Boklm (talk) 20:50, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Boklm (talk) 20:50, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, this is where film falls short: its ability to retain detail and color in the shadows is nowhere near what a modern digital camera can do. The sky is also noisy. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:52, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King of Hearts. Besides technical issues I like the path and the person in this scene but you can hardly see them, the area is too dark. --Basotxerri (talk) 08:55, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the composition, and the film grain doesn't bother me, but the colours look unrealistically purple. I think the white balance needs changing for me. Cmao20 (talk) 14:56, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 04:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:18, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Muelle Monroe, Chicago, Illinois, Estados Unidos, 2012-10-20, DD 10.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2020 at 13:10:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#United_States
Info View of quite Monroe Harbor in fall at dawn, Chicago, Illinois, USA. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:10, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Resolution not huge (one of your older images) but it's all sharp. A peaceful and restful photo, I like the letterbox-style crop and the soft pastel colours. Cmao20 (talk) 14:39, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:49, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 07:50, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 00:55, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:06, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:22, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:36, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The Great Isaiah Scroll MS A (1QIsa) - Google Art Project.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2020 at 17:44:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Religion#Judaism
Info created by unknown, file provided by User:Dcoetzee/Google Art Project - uploaded by Dcoetzee - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 17:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 20:12, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:53, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Important and interesting Cmao20 (talk) 14:53, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:16, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:37, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 04:42, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:30, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:17, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Double-crested cormorant at Sutro Baths-6460.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2020 at 02:48:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Order_:_Suliformes
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:48, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:48, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:51, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressing shot. --Basotxerri (talk) 08:48, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support good colors. --Mile (talk) 10:17, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:43, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition and quality, though I'd like a bit more sky on top. You should nominate this FP for delisting. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:57, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A ^(talk) 20:01, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 20:28, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:36, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:15, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 00:53, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:09, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:13, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 11:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It seems staged :-) Very nice -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:36, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support that light... — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:03, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:24, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:22, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Order_:_Suliformes

File:Macracantha arcuata - Curved Spiny Spider (8550192839) by Rushen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2020 at 05:26:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Family_:_Araneidae_(Orb-weaver_Spiders)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by Agathoclea - nominated by Ivar (talk) 05:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 05:26, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 09:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! Cmao20 (talk) 14:59, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've never seen this spider, but looking at the brightness of the leaves and comparing the red body with other images online, it appears oversaturated. I would prefer the crop symmetrical. ̃Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:34, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive horns! 👹 -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed, very unusual. --A.Savin 16:57, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:23, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support would also prefer a more symmetrical crop (or an even less symmetrical crop) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support would prefer more breathing room at the bottom and top. Also, symmetrical crop probably would be better. Renata3 (talk) 08:46, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per others. Daniel Case (talk) 16:09, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:21, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:14, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:15, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Family_:_Araneidae_(Orb-weaver_Spiders)

File:George V and Nicholas II in Berlin, 1913.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 18:20:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1910-1920
Info Nicholas II of Russia (left) and George V of Great Britain (right) in German military uniforms in Berlin, 1913. created by Ernst Sandau - uploaded by Júpiter y Juno - nominated by Alsakan -- Alsakan (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alsakan (talk) 18:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A famous pic. They look almost like twins - really reminds you of how close the European aristocracy was until the First World War disrupted the old paradigm. Cmao20 (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support they were not twins - but cousins ;-) --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:14, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although he condemned his cousin --Sonya7iv (talk) 14:11, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Low quality, even considering the "historical bonus". --A.Savin 14:27, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:32, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A ^(talk) 20:02, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:58, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:28, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:25, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MartinD (talk) 14:23, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:07, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1910-1920

File:Wroclaw- Zespol Hali Stulecia z fontannami.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2020 at 18:21:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Fountains
Info created by Jar.ciurus - uploaded by Jar.ciurus - nominated by Piotr Bart -- Piotr Bart (talk) 18:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Piotr Bart (talk) 18:21, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dramatic, but pretty clearly tilted. Cmao20 (talk) 19:39, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good lighting. --ToprakM ^✉ 22:43, 13 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the colours, but apart from that there is not much eye-catching in the picture. --A.Savin 14:23, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin. --MB-one (talk) 17:28, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice picture, but the opposing voices are convincing. --Andrei (talk) 22:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very random composition. Daniel Case (talk) 15:05, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:08, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Casa histórica de Abbasi, Kashan, Irán, 2016-09-19, DD 78.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2020 at 13:34:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Iran
Info View of one of the six courtyards of the Abbāsi House, a large traditional historical house located in Kashan, Iran. Built during the late 18th century, it is said to have been the property of a famous cleric. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 13:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:34, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose. The bottom crop leaves me wanting to see more; I feel like we could have more of the courtyard and less of the sky. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:14, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good image but I think it's too similar to this. No reason for both to be featured, and the other one has a better composition. Cmao20 (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Ok, you are right, agree Poco a poco (talk) 08:25, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 09:36, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Justizgebäude in Tübingen zur goldenen Stunde.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2020 at 02:04:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info all by Dktue -- Dktue (talk) 02:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dktue (talk) 02:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice but would be an even stronger composition if the far left were cropped out to get rid of the extra leaves and half of a shed. Note also that there is very, very slight keystoning. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:48, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's quite good, a QI, and probably the best we have to illustrate this building, but still too ordinary for an FP. The parking cars do not do the overall composition good, either. --A.Savin 17:04, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin.--Peulle (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not special enough and I agree with A.Savin about the cars -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:15, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Golden hour should make the subject look special; here it doesn't. Daniel Case (talk) 20:29, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Laitche (talk) 05:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hạ Long Bay, Ti Tốp Island, 2020-01 CN-01.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2020 at 21:42:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
Info created by Steffen Schmitz - uploaded by Steffen Schmitz - nominated by Chloe -- 阿 ^talk 21:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- 阿 ^talk 21:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow --Sonya7iv (talk) 21:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not with the communications pole. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:06, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Wow indeed, but surely the horizon is tilted up at the left? Cmao20 (talk) 22:25, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A very beautiful place but the foreground is dominating rather than complementing the scene. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:51, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment/ Info Thank you very much for the nomination, Chloe! I also thought about a featured potential of this place and the image, but I agree it's difficult right now.
Charlesjsharp: It isn't possible to take a good photo at this position without the pole, but I think it could be possible to clone it out. That will be very difficult for me (missing experierence) and will take a lot of time (a crop on the left isn't an option for me).
Cmao20: I have exactly the same feeling. Unfortunately, I failed to save the right RAW version and I cannot see an appropriate area for a perfect orientation (how many degrees rotation are necessary?)
But I definitely disagree with King of Hearts because I like the general composition with the foreground and don't think it's (too) distracting.
As I said, I need more time for the improvements. Perhaps a renomination in a few weeks/months might be the best. --kaʁstn 23:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Carschten: It's not by a wide margin; it's just that the foreground is touching/obscuring the scene in the back in certain areas, such as the antenna and the bush on the right. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:38, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination For me, this photo is an absolute wow, I think it will definitely pass through as FA if there isn't that antenna mast on the left side of the photos :'(. Therefore I decide to withdraw my nomination to give the author enough time for improvement. Btw Carschten, if you do allow me, I would love to nominate it again next time ^^ --阿 ^talk 00:11, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Forest Tower of Camp Adventure - people walking in circles.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2020 at 18:46:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Denmark
Info created by Stig Nygaard, Flickr - uploaded & nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Definitely has wow-factor, but there is a lot of purple CA on the railings at the top. Cmao20 (talk) 21:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blurry parts at the top right. The image also appears to be somewhat deformed. and the symetry is missing.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:52, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Parts seem a little distorted; other parts blurry. I can't tell how much of this is the shape of the structure/slopes and how much is the camera/lens, but the overall effect feels off. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:57, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 08:26, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 12:48, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chute Montmorency3.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2020 at 12:42:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Québec
Info: a rainbow below the Montmorency Falls, Quebec, Canada. -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 12:42, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a nice waterfall and the rainbow adds an extra touch. But it's neither that striking, nor of superior quality to command a FP. Sorry. --MB-one (talk) 17:33, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per MBone --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:08, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I was excited to see this image because it is the city where I live but unfortunately the quality is very low --Wilfredor (talk) 20:06, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The quality is of course not "very low" (please refrain from obviously unfair assessments, Wilfredor...), but nonetheless the picture seems like an out-of-camera jpeg, and there are many chromatic aberrations. We don't accept CA's for a good reason: there are not only unnecessary, but also very easy to remove, especially if the picture is made from the RAW file. --A.Savin 23:04, 14 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MB-one.--Peulle (talk) 08:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition is fine but I agree with A. Savin, this picture is surely an out-of-camera JPEG and it seems that the in-camera noise reduction and other processing has made the photo look worse quality than it is. Going back to the RAW could make this a lot better for me. Cmao20 (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support though the crop is a bit too tight at top right. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:16, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MB-one. Daniel Case (talk) 18:24, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive. And I prefer the natural presentation of the falling water. --Milseburg (talk) 14:24, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MB-one Piotr Bart (talk) 07:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:14, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arnhem, spoorbrug Oosterbeek bij zonsondergang IMG 3527 2020-03-23 18.38.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2020 at 20:01:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Netherlands
Info All by -- Michielverbeek (talk) 20:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Michielverbeek (talk) 20:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much haze/flare. The grass immediately below the sun has a red tint, and much of the landscape is a contrastless grey. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:11, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sorry, but agree that there are issues with haze and lack of detail in the foreground. I feel like it might be fixable if part of a larger/wider composition sufficient to have the mood take over, but I'm not so sure here... — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:31, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 09:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above I think the real issue here is the lack of contrast. The hae from the sun washes out the foreground and makes it a featureless grey, whereas a sunset pic of this kind should really have darker and contrastier shadows. Perhaps it is worth revisiting this one from the RAW image. Cmao20 (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Haze and dull colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:29, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ripon Cathedral Choir 2, Nth Yorkshire, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2020 at 14:47:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#United Kingdom
Info The choir of Ripon Cathedral, Yorkshire, England. Ripon Cathedral was constructed between the thirteenth and sixteenth centuries, and is one of the co-cathedrals of the huge Diocese of Leeds. Its huge Gothic stained-glass windows are considered particularly splendid by architectural critics. created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 14:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Beautiful.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Paris 16 (talk) 17:38, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:51, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:02, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Andrei (talk) 09:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 20:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:02, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 04:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:28, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:SL Bundala NP asv2020-01 img11.jpg, fetaured, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 13:29:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Phalacrocoracidae (Cormorants)
Info Little cormorant in the Bundala National Park, Sri Lanka ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 13:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:29, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice background and good composition Cmao20 (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I prefer the info box image in English Wikipedia Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:03, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:50, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 20:37, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Charles, the other one achieves better background separation. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:29, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:05, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:42, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:19, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles and King. Daniel Case (talk) 02:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 20:28, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sri Maha Mariamman Koyil Bangkok (Wat Khaek Silom) 2019 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2020 at 06:37:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Thailand
Info created by Chainwit. - uploaded by Chainwit. - nominated by Chainwit. -- Chainwit. (talk) 06:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Chainwit. (talk) 06:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lovely temple, but dull light and people in front make it look like a random tourist pic. Details are not that sharp at full size to compensate. Sorry. Renata3 (talk) 08:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Renata. --Basotxerri (talk) 14:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose To me this falls into the QI but not FP category. It's a very interesting place and could certainly have an FP-level photo taken, but the dull, featureless grey sky and the people cluttering the entrance (though I appreciate this might be hard to avoid if this location attracts a lot of tourists) mean that it isn't special enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 15:55, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Could I suggest Chainwit. that you wait till your image gets a positive vote at QI before nominating for FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:24, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for all of your comments! This was my first nomination, so I might not fully understand the standards (of which I now realise what I should improve in the future). ----Chainwit. (talk) 16:28, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Time to withdraw the nomination. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Triton Lake and Powerscourt House, Enniskerry 20150807 2.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 12:53:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Ireland
Info Triton Lake and Powerscourt House, Enniskerry, Ireland. c/u/n by -- DXR (talk) 12:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- DXR (talk) 12:53, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The moody sky makes this photo. Cmao20 (talk) 13:51, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Two trees, a large building and a nice dark sky. IMO the trees, especially the left one draws my attention while the building in the background is the main object --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:56, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice atmosphere. I would crop out the tree on the far left because the grass below it is light green and detracts from the center of the image. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michielverbeek. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:44, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding composition as it is. --Milseburg (talk) 14:29, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The cloud sort of steals the scene here, and the tree's also trying to. Daniel Case (talk) 21:01, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:15, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

US Supreme Court oral arguments sketch, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 09:02:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Waxman for petitioner
Chemerinsky for respondent

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Groups (although I feel like Non-photographic media/Others might be more appropriate, so if the community prefers this gallery, please say so)
Info created by Arthur Lien - uploaded by MrClog - nominated by MrClog -- MrClog (talk) 09:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It seems like my whole desciption is gone(?). Essentially, these are as far as I know the only court sketches we have from the US Supreme Court, made by one of the three court sketchers left. Although one is just short of the 2 megapixel requirement, I don't think those few extra pixels would add much more detail. -- MrClog (talk) 09:02, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. --Cart (talk) 09:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment They are a bit small, but if it's the full and original resolution that is shown here, I suppose it could be OK. There are small paintings and drawings in the world, after all. I'd be interested to hear more about that. Another thing, though: the metadata shows this copyright text: "©2019 Arthur Lien. No usage without prior consent. All rights reserved." I'd also be interested to hear how this connects with the Commons licensing. An image with restrictions is less useful than a freely licensed one.--Peulle (talk) 11:40, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There is prior consent - it is given in the OTRS ticket. I don't view "All rights reserved" as having any legal difference from "Some rights reserved" when coming from the author; in both cases, the author technically still reserves all rights, but may choose to license any of them as they see fit. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 13:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Peulle: The copyright notice in the metadata is pretty common among artist that digitise their works, because it makes it easier to proof their case in court when there's a copyvio. However, Arthur Lien released these two under a CC-BY-SA license and confirmed this via OTRS, and he presumably didn't change the metadata. There is - I believe - a version with a higher resolution (not sure what the difference in pixels is), although Arthur chose to keep that one in case someone wants the highest resolution - so they'd still need to pay him. The resolution right now is still good and it's unlikely we'll (possibly ever) get a SCOTUS sketch in a similar or higher resolution. --MrClog (talk) 15:11, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, if this is a case of images of reduced resolution having been uploaded to Commons rather than the full resolution versions, I'm afraid I'm going to have to ~~Oppose~~ as a matter of principle.--Peulle (talk) 15:59, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Peulle: Actually, it appears we do not have a reduced res version. If you look at the webstore, the best download they sell is 865 x 1225px, and ours is better than that. I suppose he uses the higher resolution version like this one if someone purchases a printed version. --MrClog (talk) 17:01, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's fair enough, I suppose, so I'll remain Neutral on this one. Just so I'm being clear for the future: if someone out there has a high resolution image, then uploads a lower resolution of that image to Commons and keeps the higher one for themselves, I will never support it as an FP.--Peulle (talk) 11:30, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support The minimum resolution is ~2 MP, and we should only demand higher resolution if the bar would otherwise be set too low (i.e. we would be flooded with nominations). We already have de facto minima of ~20 MP for skyline panoramas and ~10 MP for landscape (though we'll sometimes accept lower given POTY-worthy "wow"), but still only ~2 MP for small treebirds and hummingbirds because it's so hard to get close enough to them. This is a genre which did not exist at all before these two donations, and we should be grateful for what we can get. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:31, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No real wow, resolution too low -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:22, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:46, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per MrClog and King of Hearts. Featured status may additionally encourage further submissions. MarsInSVG (talk) 17:09, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great value! --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:05, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:37, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Higher resolution would not add any benefit in this case. Renata3 (talk) 20:37, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. -- Alsakan (talk) 19:49, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jacek Malczewski - Polish Hamlet - Google Art Project.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2020 at 07:59:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/People#Groups
Info created by Jacek Malczewski - uploaded by Artinpl/MNW/Google Institute - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 07:59, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Polish Hamlet by Jacek Malczewski, representing two different visions of the fate of the Polish nation. Malczewski is one of the most revered painters of Poland, associated with the Young Poland movement, this is one of his most well known paintings. Colors are original. -- Andrei (talk) 07:59, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only 6 MP, which is not that impressive for a 100 x 148 cm painting. I don't see what makes this exceptional compared to the other reproductions of paintings that we have. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:59, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
This nomination seems to be hopeless so I withdraw my nomination Andrei (talk) 21:21, 23 May 2020 (UTC).[reply]

File:Silek Lanyah padang panjang.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2020 at 12:24:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created by Fajar.adjay - uploaded by Fajar.adjay - nominated by Mimihitam -- Mimihitam (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mimihitam (talk) 12:24, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose statues too dark, blown on left. Seven Pandas (talk) 14:53, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Seven Pandas just FYI, they are actual people performing martial arts, not statues :) Mimihitam (talk) 17:51, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- OK, but they're still too dark and out of focus. The photo is also grainy. ISO is 3000.Seven Pandas (talk) 18:14, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:48, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The noise is far too high for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:52, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The light is wrong. Compare with Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Silek Lanyah 2020 - Two men performing martial art in a stream.jpg that was promoted in March. Also the settings are not really adapted (F/2.8 is not enough, resulting in poor DoF). -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Mimihitam (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019 - Parc national des Pyrenees - refuge des Espuguettes.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2020 at 15:49:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/France#Hautes-Pyrénées
Info A very beautiful panorama taken in the Pyrénées National Park. created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As the refuge is the subject, it should have sun on it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I see this rather as a splendid panorama than as a photo of the mountain hut, therefore I really enjoy it. --Aristeas (talk) 10:42, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support At first I was going to oppose, per Charles' comment, but then I took a close look and realized that, in the shade, the shape of the lodge (I like the way its roofline is echoed in the mountains above it) and its color and material blend into the environment better than they would if it were sunlit. Daniel Case (talk) 21:36, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:51, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:55, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:41, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:19, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:31, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 04:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:48, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:11, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/France#Hautes-Pyrénées

File:Epitonium pallasi 01.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2020 at 15:57:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Epitoniidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 15:57, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 19:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support as usual. Cmao20 (talk) 22:14, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:06, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:26, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 10:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:55, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:00, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:20, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:25, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Andrei (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 08:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:53, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:48, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Fliegenpilz (Amanita muscaria)-20191014-RM-153953.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2020 at 08:01:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Amanitaceae
Info All by me -- Ermell (talk) 08:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 08:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composiiton and quality stack. Bonus points for the spider. Perhaps we should have an FP photobombing category.Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC) ̴̴[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 10:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very well done with the foreground focus stacked and the bokeh behind. Slug and spider bring extra value -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:50, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support; one for the image and one for the spider. Great job! Ahmad^talk 11:58, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is a funny voting icon, but I doubt that the bot is going to take it into account, Ahmad, not even half of a "double support", unfortunately :-) Basile Morin (talk) 12:24, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, changed to a normal {{Support}}. But frankly, I think the bot should reconsider :-) Ahmad^talk 13:05, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 13:24, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:46, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:18, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am not into mushrooms (had a bad poisoning from them as a child), but your photos of them are great and free of poison ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 10:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tremendous Cmao20 (talk) 14:55, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 17:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:56, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:19, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:05, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Ground agama (Agama aculeata) in water.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2020 at 16:41:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Agamidae (Dragon Lizards)
Info Please have a look at the tail. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, sharp, and colorful. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:10, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 19:45, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support lovely critter with two passengers on its tail. Points for improvement -- the crop is pretty tight on the tail end. Plus back leg is rather blurry, but it's understandable. Renata3 (talk) 20:33, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The left crop is too tight, but still, excellent. Cmao20 (talk) 22:15, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:49, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:01, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:54, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Subject perfectly caught, good focus, sharp, nice DoF. Interesting situation and the background is very nice -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:19, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:10, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting to see the cooperation between animals, I never thought that some insects would use other animals as transportation --Wilfredor (talk) 17:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Charles, would you have supported this one if someone else had uploaded it? There's not enough room on the left and I've seen scores of images getting rejected for much smaller flaws. You know I like and highly honor your work, so don't take this as an attack. I just know that people here are pretty harsh when judging each other's pictures and I'd like to remind all of us to be as kind and forgiving to others as they are to us. Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:34, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Good points, Frank, all images have flaws, and so does this user. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support In the spirit of what I said above. I don't mind small flaws and I think this image is still fascinating enough to be featured. In particular, I like the way you've captured the interplay of the lizard with the water surface. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:56, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment If I knew how I got the beautiful water patterns Frank I could have it as one of my TIPS, but I've no idea how to replicate it (I just used my normal skylight 1A filter). Anyone? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:09, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:47, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:12, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family : Agamidae (Dragon Lizards)

File:Raureif in der Hessischen Rhön.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2020 at 11:35:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Hesse
Info created by Milseburg - uploaded by Milseburg - nominated by Milseburg -- Milseburg (talk) 11:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 11:35, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support great mood & colors --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:47, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Poco a poco (talk) 17:17, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really nice vanishing-point composition and very clear main tree. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:22, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:53, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 04:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:30, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Charles. --Aristeas (talk) 10:45, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment About 1/2 stop underexposed IMO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 12:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:38, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Charles, I actually really love this. Cmao20 (talk) 21:21, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:21, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 14:57, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:59, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:43, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:06, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:46, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:13, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Saint Peter of Alcantara Church in Karviná-Doly 2020 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2020 at 18:15:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Czech Republic
Info all by me -- T.Bednarz (talk) 18:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I particularly like the contrast between the straight water surface and the reflexed church building which is leaning due to the coal mining affect. -- T.Bednarz (talk) 18:15, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't think it's straight - regardless of how the building is leaning, a point on the building should be on the same vertical line as its reflection. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:33, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry but I'm afraid I don't get your point. The verticals of the building are displayed flipped over as they should be. Does your remark apply to this? --T.Bednarz (talk) 20:22, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have annotated two points which are supposed to be in a straight line. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:57, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very nice and unique building. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~It is slightly tilted.~~ Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:55, 15 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ until the above problem is fixed. For a building that is actually tilted in real life, it's important that the tilt is captured accurately on camera, otherwise the picture is misleading. At the moment it makes out that the tilt is more than it is; as KoH points out, you can tell by the reflection that the picture clearly slopes upwards to the right. Otherwise this is great and I'd like to be able to vote support. Cmao20 (talk) 00:04, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info @King of Hearts and Cmao20: I've straightened the image per KoH's remarks. --T.Bednarz (talk) 11:37, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:41, 16 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 05:20, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The mood is great. I wish the church was sharper, but maybe the softness is due to haze. --Aristeas (talk) 07:48, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Despite the straightening no wow recognizable. --Fischer.H (talk) 08:04, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 05:27, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice early-spring early-morning mood, as noted, but not really that exceptional. Daniel Case (talk) 05:32, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for lack of wow, the mood/composition is not working for me. Renata3 (talk) 08:48, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:15, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel Case --Andrei (talk) 08:08, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jaguar (Panthera onca palustris) female Piquiri River 2.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2020 at 08:26:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
Info Taken at ISO 3,200 because of light conditions, but a head-on shot at eye level is rare. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:26, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:26, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow.--Ermell (talk) 14:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another pretty fucking Crazy dangerous picture by Charles. More photographers like him are needed here, who are capable of going beyond immobile structures. Thanks! --Wilfredor (talk) 15:04, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:13, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:26, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 20:29, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support great quality for ISO 3200, I wouldn't have guessed the ISO was so high Cmao20 (talk) 21:23, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 08:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Face to face with that big cat – great! --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:17, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support what do you use for noise reduction? this looks good for that ISO. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:53, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Please see Page 20 from my new free magazine Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:19, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 06:21, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:46, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:05, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captivating -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 20:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jhonatha Conection - Portal da Chapada das Mesas.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2020 at 00:34:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Brazil
Info created by Jhonatha Conection - uploaded by Kaldari - nominated by Kaldari -- Kaldari (talk) 00:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kaldari (talk) 00:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry. IMO trouble with sharpness and blown out clouds. May be f/8 would have been better. Rework from RAW file could be a solution. --XRay ^talk 04:34, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks like HDR where the images are not congruent.--Ermell (talk) 14:33, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per XRay. --Basotxerri (talk) 20:31, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose regretfully per Ermell and XRay, nice composition but the processing is not ideal Cmao20 (talk) 21:22, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 08:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blown cloud on top, too. Daniel Case (talk) 23:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Slovenian Railways freight train.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2020 at 10:12:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
Info I think this one if FP enough. Almost high noon shot, not to catch great colors but to get strong shot (high temperature, evaporation, refraction, pulling locomotive). All by me. -- Mile (talk) 10:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 10:12, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quite a lot of blue/purple CA at the top that should be fixed. Otherwise, good shot but I think I might like to see a bit more of the train, rather than a front-view that leaves most of it obscured. Cmao20 (talk) 15:00, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Train is too shadowed and background is too blurry for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:30, 17 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For me it's the composition that spoils it. I'd prefer a panorama shot of the whole train.--Peulle (talk) 11:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think even without the high standard set by David's rail photos, I'd probably still not see this one quite as an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 16:13, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great atmosphere. --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:05, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find the light unappealing -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:39, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:07, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Glyphoglossus guttulatus, Striped spadefoot frog - Kaeng Krachan District, Phetchaburi (47568146392).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2020 at 15:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Family_:_Microhylidae_(Narrow-Mouthed_Frogs)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by B2Belgium - nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:58, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:58, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Too many parts of the photo are not sharp enough for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:38, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question Is that not an oppose, then? Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:20, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: the benefit of the doubt.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:07, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The DoF is definitely a bit shallow on this one. Maybe not Rushenb's best. Cmao20 (talk) 14:53, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 04:51, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Southern crested caracara (Caracara plancus).JPG[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2020 at 09:28:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Falconidae (Falcons)
Info All by Charlersjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support No issues here. Cmao20 (talk) 14:57, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 16:36, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The bird sits quite far down in the picture and unfortunately the tail is missing.--Ermell (talk) 18:39, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Your're right Ermell and I didn't spot that. Not FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:41, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Salses-le-Château - Forteresse 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2020 at 11:47:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#France
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 11:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 11:47, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The lower cut ruins the composition, I do not know if it is possible to introduce the camera a little closer to the edge (very carefully) so that this edge is not shown --Wilfredor (talk) 13:10, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Info Unfortunately it is not possible, but do you think that this viewpoint is better (and should be nominated instead)? --Llez (talk) 13:26, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment I do find the composition better, but it has chromatic aberrations. Renata3 (talk) 08:38, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Question Could you please make annotations where the CAs are? --Llez (talk) 13:10, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
      - There is a ring around most of the top of the castle, most noticeable around that small tower on the left. I made an annotation, but it's hard to do on such a large file. Renata3 (talk) 20:23, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO no, sorry but the wall ruins both compositions. I would try to get close to the edge and place the camera alone going down with a tripod with a remote shutter release --Wilfredor (talk) 16:49, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:39, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 05:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hmm, wonder why I forgot to vote on this earlier. It seems fine to me, no obvious quality issues and composition looks good. Cmao20 (talk) 17:57, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Moerasvaren (Thelypteris palustris). 26-04-2020 (d.j.b.) 05.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2020 at 15:15:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Thelypteridaceae
Info Beautifully unrolling leaf of a palustris on the waterfront. The background is the water. Location, Jonker valley garden reserve.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:15, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 18:25, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:50, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:02, 18 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:03, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support good photo, but composition could be better angle-wise -- less stem, more curled leaves. Renata3 (talk) 08:43, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Andrei (talk) 09:17, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent again. Cmao20 (talk) 15:50, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:18, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The leaf is beautiful but I am not convinced by the composition and the darker triangle in the background. -- B2Belgium (talk) 20:31, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:51, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per B2B. Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:08, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lithobates sylvaticus.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2020 at 17:23:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Family_:_Ranidae (True Frogs)
Info: Wood frog (Lithobates sylvaticus); all by --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:23, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:23, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Despite the high F no. the eye is not in focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:18, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but I agree with Charles. Not enough of this photo is sharp for FP. I could forgive the unsharp eye if the back legs were in focus, but they aren't. I understand how tough it is to get a good depth of field but this one isn't FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 14:55, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 00:18, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:33, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:San Francisco under Quarantine.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2020 at 06:37:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#United States
Info created by Christopher Michel - uploaded by Mikani - nominated by Mxn -- Minh Nguyễn ^💬 06:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking pattern, great angle, and notable. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 06:37, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Would love to support, but unfortunately too small and blurry. Renata3 (talk) 07:43, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support quality not too high, but very unique and high educational value. Tomer T (talk) 07:44, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice idea, need a better camera. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:04, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Big WOW. --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Peulle (talk) 08:54, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Fresh idea. I may support, if the original resolution with more level of details was uploaded. --A.Savin 13:57, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course more resolution would be nice, but this is one of those photos where its striking originality outweighs concerns over technical quality. Cmao20 (talk) 14:56, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral This is a brilliant shot but unfortunately resolution is too low. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:24, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
May 24, 2020
Comment @Renata3, Charlesjsharp, Peulle, A.Savin, and King of Hearts: The photographer returned yesterday with a better camera, but unfortunately by then the circles had faded a bit and there weren't as many people out in the park using them. I think I still prefer the original photo for more variety compared to the later photo. It's possible that the crowds will come back out another weekend, but I'm not sure if the photographer will keep returning to this spot. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 18:01, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The original does look better at thumbnail size, but I would certainly vote for the picture on the right if the original never existed. So that makes it more suitable to become Commons FP. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:08, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I've linked the two photos together so readers can discover them both. Should I open a new nomination for the higher-resolution photo or just swap it in? (Or would it be a stretch to nominate a set of just two photos?) – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 18:26, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They obviously returned with the same drone/camera. --A.Savin 19:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Mxn: Perhaps we could ask the Flickr user whether they have a higher-resolution version of the first image and would be willing to share it? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@King of Hearts: It's like they read our minds. :^) – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 18:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:42, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In The Times of London today. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:31, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others --Neptuul (talk) 17:19, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Memorial Day
Comment Christopher Michel came back on Memorial Day for a higher-resolution shot with more people, so I've opened a new nomination for that image specifically: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Memorial Day 2020 - San Francisco Under Quarantine (49935629483).jpg. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 18:06, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You shouldn't have the two running nominations (by the way I find self-indulgent complicated user names annoying - they are difficult to copy - not just yours of courseǃ) User:Mxn Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:34, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: Thanks for the suggestion! This is my first nomination ever, so I wasn't aware of the process for withdrawing a nomination. I've done that below. As for (presumably) my signature, there's a number of reasons why changing my user name to my real name is impractical at this point, but I do prefer to sign my real name as a gesture of accountability. (I only use CSS small-caps to clarify which is the family name, because Vietnamese names normally put the family name first, whereas I'm following the Western convention on wikis where I normally use English.) Thank you for being patient with me. – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 18:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination in favor of Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Memorial Day 2020 - San Francisco Under Quarantine (49935629483).jpg – Minh Nguyễn ^💬 18:40, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Asian hornet (33283876513) (2).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2020 at 04:45:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family_:_Vespidae_(Hornets,_Paper_Wasps,_Potter_Wasps,_and_Yellowjackets)
Info created by & uploaded by Gilles San Martin - nominated by Ivar (talk) 04:45, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 04:45, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 12:58, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow --Sonya7iv (talk) 14:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Scary Cmao20 (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very poorly executed focus-stacking. see notes. With 126 images, there should be no problem for Gilles San Martin to stack it again with good software. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:27, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For a stack that deep way more should be in focus. Seven Pandas (talk) 19:53, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The focus stacking could have been better, but this is a minor issue with regards to the challenge of photographing details of this size. Most of the head is in focus. Impressive image -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:07, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:16, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:12, 20 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 17:31, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:20, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:49, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Grtek (talk) 10:54, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 12:43, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:04, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family_:_Vespidae_(Hornets,_Paper_Wasps,_Potter_Wasps,_and_Yellowjackets)

File:Fin garden ceiling.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2020 at 11:18:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Domes
Info created by User:Amirpashaei - uploaded by User:Amirpashaei - nominated by Amirpashaei -- Amirpashaei (talk) 11:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Amirpashaei (talk) 11:18, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:02, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:03, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Wow. Excellent motif, very high resolution and good sharpness at full size. Cmao20 (talk) 15:45, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition and excellent resolution. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:49, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:44, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 09:57, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 11:06, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:25, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 18:15, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Such spam is unacceptable. Please fix your categories first. --A.Savin 01:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@A.Savin: Seems fine now. Hanooz 21:34, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Amirpashaei: Say thankyou to your colleague Hanooz. --A.Savin 22:52, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:42, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain I can't get the large image viewer to open this one up. Daniel Case (talk) 15:22, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 21:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- --PERSIA♠ 07:02, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:03, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Maria Wörth Reifnitz Schloss Klein-Miramar NO-Ansicht 06052019 6802.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2020 at 16:44:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
Info IMO a nice restful composition and excellent image quality. Created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:47, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful composition--Famberhorst (talk) 04:46, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:36, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:54, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 11:04, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:21, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:24, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --T.Bednarz (talk) 18:17, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Seven Pandas (talk) 11:40, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 20:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 03:19, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:03, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 22:35, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- B2Belgium (talk) 10:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Grtek (talk) 10:41, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bob Collowan (talk) 17:46, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:24, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:00, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Persépolis, Irán, 2016-09-24, DD 15.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 May 2020 at 16:27:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Reliefs
Info Bas-reliefs of Achaemenid warriors at the Southern staircase of Tachara in Persepolis, today Iran. As the oldest of the palace structures on the Terrace at Persepolis, it was constructed of the finest quality gray stone. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 16:27, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 16:27, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent quality and resolution, and interesting motif. Cmao20 (talk) 22:21, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:23, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:04, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:00, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:27, 24 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:28, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 22:04, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- --PERSIA♠ 07:03, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:53, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:29, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Hairdresser cutting hair.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2020 at 14:05:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 14:05, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice idea but it doesn't work for me. Not sure what the messy background adds to the photograph, and I also feel like I'd like to see more at the bottom of the frame. Also everything in this pic looks a little bit bunched together in the midtones, with no real shadows or highlights. All in all I think this is a good and useful QI of a man doing his job, but not more than that. Cmao20 (talk) 15:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

These types of hairdressers are widely spread in Venezuela. People often cut hair in the backyard of their houses, and btw hygiene in the third world is different, what you call messy is more reuse of recycled materials as the only option as objects are almost never discarded. --Wilfredor (talk) 18:14, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Perhaps a VI for the reasons Wilfredor mentioned, but just doesn't make it as FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 02:32, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel. --T.Bednarz (talk) 19:44, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the negative reviews that are very important to me too. Wilfredor (talk) 17:46, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red kite (Milvus milvus).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2020 at 09:46:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus_:_Milvus
Info During the oil seed rape harvest, the red kites hunt close to the ground, waiting for small mammals to run out into the open. I originally had a closer crop on this, but I like the clouds, so gave it a wider crop. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:46, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 12:27, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good Cmao20 (talk) 17:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:59, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately too small for FP. 80% of this image is boring sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:26, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:03, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lack of detail. --Ivar (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 18:12, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Christof46 (talk) 19:17, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose feathers gone with the noise reduction. - Benh (talk) 20:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile -- Alsakan (talk) 02:05, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:08, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:09, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bergtocht van Guarda via Ardez en Ftan naar Scuol. 20-09-2019. (actm.) 27.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2020 at 15:45:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Switzerland
Info This Ruina chanoua at Ardez is going to blend into the landscape under a beautiful sky. (talk)
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 16:33, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 17:23, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:00, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:06, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 22:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, nice lighting - look like a magazine photo. Cmao20 (talk) 22:45, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 04:52, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:04, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is it just me or is the building falling over like the lighthouse nomination below? Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:45, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: This ruin is no longer square. And is propped on the inside to keep the walls upright.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:57, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:29, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 22:32, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 12:35, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:39, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /pandakekok9 11:16, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Dülmen, Merfeld, Wildpferdebahn, Dülmener Wildpferde -- 2020 -- 7245.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2020 at 17:19:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Order_:_Perissodactyla_(Odd-toed_ungulates)
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 17:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay ^talk 17:19, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The composition is too jumbled for me, with the ponies all facing different directions and failing to present a cohesive message. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:02, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great quality but I agree with KoH, it looks a bit too much like a snapshot rather than a careful composition. Good QI though and probably great for illustrating the animal in Wikipedia etc. Cmao20 (talk) 22:47, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The light is not working for me -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 07:33, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Du hast da noch andere Aufnahmen in der Serie, die mir besser gefallen haben. Auf jeden Fall ein tolles Motiv. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:49, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ja, mir gefallen auch mehrere. Als Fotograf bin ich immer ein wenig voreingenommen, bin aber für jeden Tipp dankbar. ;-) --XRay ^talk 16:54, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

z.B. diese Aufnahme (kann allerdings sein, dass die Ausrichtung noch leicht korrigiert werden muss) —Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:34, 26 May 2020 (UTC) P.S. Oder auch dieses…[reply]

Danke für die Tipps! Ich nehme sie gerne auf. --XRay ^talk 18:11, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per King and Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 28 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /pandakekok9 11:15, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tiefenstürmig Feuersalamander -20200314-RM-165910.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2020 at 15:00:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Family : Salamandridae (True Salamanders)
Info Fire salamander on its way to spawn in a stream in Franconian Switzerland. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 15:00, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 15:00, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Andrei (talk) 17:57, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Is this nomination seriously meant? --A.Savin 19:35, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Constructive criticism is always welcome--Ermell (talk) 20:47, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Fascinating creature but I'm not sure of the wisdom of featuring an image where most of the subject is out of focus. I get what you were trying to do, but I don't think it works for me Cmao20 (talk) 21:24, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The part of the animal that is under water cannot be sharp. Waterfall pictures are also nominated here although everything is out of focus.--Ermell (talk) 22:41, 21 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support The point here is that salamanders are amphibians, i.e. animals who can only reproduce in waters. In my opinion, illuminating that specific aspect and showing the salamander in its habitat outweights the constant desire here on FPC candidates for all parts of an animal being "in focus". High educational value, therefore I support this nomination. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:46, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An interesting idea, using very low speed, but it leaves nothing in focus. The blurred water doesn't work for me either. Artifical light/flash to allow faster shutter speed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:29, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Frank put it very well. --Aristeas (talk) 08:39, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles.--Peulle (talk) 08:40, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Cmao20 Poco a poco (talk) 10:09, 22 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers. --Cayambe (talk) 06:44, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. --Fischer.H (talk) 08:30, 23 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 01:54, 25 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /pandakekok9 11:18, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Resedafalter am Morgen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2020 at 09:53:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Pieridae (Whites and Sulphurs)
Info created & uploaded by Sven Damerow - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:53, 26 May 2020 (UTC
Support --Ivar (talk) 09:57, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support We've had a similar amazing early morning shot from this photographer. I think this one is even better (and with EXIF data). For sure, an amazing professional's camera, but used so well. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:28, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:47, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing how sharp the water droplets on the butterfly are. Cmao20 (talk) 17:15, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sonya7iv (talk) 22:30, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! Pleasant composition, high resolution, interesting details at full size -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:29, 26 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:00, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- --PERSIA♠ 07:01, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:07, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:10, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- B2Belgium (talk) 10:09, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 11:55, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow Poco a poco (talk) 18:13, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:53, 27 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:52, 29 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:17, 30 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wish it were possible to see that degree of sharpness on the flower, too, but as everyone else said, the details of the droplets and butterfly are superb and beautiful. Strong nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Tomer T (talk) 20:08, 31 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Pieridae (Whites and Sulphurs)