Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2022

File:FCAB GT22CU-3 2405, GT22CU-3 2401, GL26C-2 2005 Cumbre - Pampa.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2022 at 11:40:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 11:40, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 11:40, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 16:05, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mile (talk) 16:22, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:38, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:05, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 22:05, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:06, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 06:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:24, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing scenery -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 00:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Brass instruments, Tuba, part of.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2022 at 18:01:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Musical instruments
Info For those who love minimalist shots. c/u/n by --Kreuz schnabel 18:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain as author --Kreuz schnabel 18:01, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The photographed is reflected in the instrument, and anything is in focus? --Ezarateesteban 22:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It's a good photo and I quite like it, but where's the wow? --SHB2000 (talk) 04:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The artist is present. --Mile (talk) 08:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment IMHO the composition is not minimalist (too many elements without clear geometrical relation), and I have to confess that I understand neither the composition nor the placement of the plane of focus. --Aristeas (talk) 08:23, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others; an interesting idea but too busy compositionally. Daniel Case (talk) 20:36, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 3 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gray catbird (85315).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2022 at 01:26:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Mimidae_(Mockingbirds_and_Thrashers)
Info Gray catbird (Dumatella carolinensis), member of the mockingbird family. I like the light of this shot, and that you can clearly see the "secret" reddish feathers under the tail. :) all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:26, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love its sharpness! --SHB2000 (talk) 04:04, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Check the eye. Sharpening effects. --Mile (talk) 08:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- You mean the reflections in the eye? Those are jagged lines even in the raw version. Of course, sharpening emphasizes those lines, though. Do you think it would be better to restore the eye from this version? — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:51, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Actually nothing mutch you can do (spent some 30min solving), or just take eye from 1st shot or leave it, saw those are shadows of tree branch. And that blue-cyan just physics passing by. --Mile (talk) 16:37, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I just uploaded a version that undoes the sharpening on the eye. Curious what people think. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Daniel Case (talk) 02:46, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great work. -- Wolf im Wald 03:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed. – I am fine with both versions of the eye. --Aristeas (talk) 05:32, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for Rhododendrites' latest version. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:48, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:18, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:51, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Familiar bluet with prey (61233).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2022 at 01:10:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family_:_Coenagrionidae_(Narrow-winged_Damselflies)
Info Familiar bluet (Enallagma civile) with prey (possibly a mosquito). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:10, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:10, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:05, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool shot. --Mile (talk) 08:17, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. – Is there a small blue halo on the top border of the leftmost part of the bluet’s body? --Aristeas (talk) 08:25, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. And yes -- but fixed now. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:01, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you very much for fixing it! --Aristeas (talk) 05:31, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:18, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:13, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:21, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 16:40, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shades of blue, especially in the eye. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:09, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:44, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:55, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:19, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Can you do something about the overexposure on the abdomen? Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family_:_Coenagrionidae_(Narrow-winged_Damselflies)

File:Meat burek (GAK bakery, Belgrade, Serbia).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2022 at 08:48:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Food
Info Meat burek. My shot. -- Mile (talk) 08:48, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 08:48, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral what is feature here? --Ezarateesteban 11:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ezarate. -- Karelj (talk) 14:54, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, the wow is missing. Just a regular food photo and tightly cropped. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 16:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The meat burek is really appetizing. It’s just the tight crop which is arguable here. --Aristeas (talk) 08:17, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose This is not bad indeed, and food photography is not at all as easy as it seems (even without an ever-starving dog nearby). Still it’s a bit too bright IMHO (losing the crisp detail on the bright parts), and I’d like to see either the entire plate or no plate at all. --Kreuz schnabel 15:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Satdeep. Daniel Case (talk) 20:01, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like seeing food photos here but in this case the crop is a bit too tight and off-centre Cmao20 (talk) 19:58, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Mile (talk) 08:35, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunrise in Shkorpilovtsi, Bulgaria 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2022 at 11:53:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Bulgaria (non-existing section yet)
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 11:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could be a bit sharper considering it wasn't dark enough to require a very long shutter, but still the mood is nice. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:00, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I might be biased by having been there and loving the place, but well - for me this shot captures all I love about the place. However I think bridges is not the right section. This is not exactly a bridge, but a pier. How about putting it into places/natural? --Kritzolina (talk) 15:01, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice, but not so different than any other sunset. Very similar to the previous nomination. Ordinary architecture and not a spectacular sky, in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:58, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose largely per Basile. Again, I'd love to see another Bulgarian FP, but this just looks like too many other piers at crepuscular times of day. Daniel Case (talk) 04:14, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice for me. --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:55, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks like any other pier at sunset to me. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:32, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I understand the objections, but the photo still makes me stop scrolling the page. Somehow I like exactly the contrast between the simple shapes of the pier and the colour gradients of sky and sea. Yes, it’s not the most spectacular beach, pier or sunset, but I still like the mood … --Aristeas (talk) 09:24, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice sunset, but hugly pier. Doesn't work together. Yann (talk) 14:43, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I think the mood is lovely but unfortunately I think I agree with Basile Morin overall, it doesn't rise above other sunset photos sufficiently to be featured Cmao20 (talk) 19:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. QI to me, but not FP. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:37, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:54, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tumba de Ramsés I, Valle de las Reyes, Luxor, Egipto, 2022-04-03, DD 103.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Oct 2022 at 19:53:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Others#Frescos_and_murals
Info Painting in the tomb of Ramesses I, Valley of the Kings, Luxor, Egypt. The scene belongs to the Book of Gates and shows the pharaoh with Horus on the left and Anubis, Protector of the Dead, on the right. Ramesses I tomb (KV16) is rather truncated as Ramesses I ruled for less than two years during the Nineteenth Dynasty, being only 29 metres (95 ft) long. It consists of two descending staircases, linking a sloping corridor and leading to the burial chamber where this scene is painted. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 19:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:53, 22 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A little noisy, but I think you may have been in a difficult situation when taking this. Daniel Case (talk) 04:16, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You can imagine, no tripods allowed there, poor lighting, lots of people,...I'm offering almost 30 MPx of detail here and I find specially these paintings are among the best conserved. I cannot believed we have something of higher quality in the project. Poco a poco (talk) 08:18, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Satdeep Gill (talk) 02:35, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support given the very difficult circumstances and the high resolution. --Aristeas (talk) 14:16, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Why do FF-ers so afarid to put some ISO 1000, 1250 or 1600 ?! I bet it would be sharper with not much added noise. --Mile (talk) 16:18, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 19:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Not your sharpest, but an excellent motif and the best photo of it on Commons Cmao20 (talk) 19:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Noisy and not very sharp. QI why not, but not FP. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:39, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review, Sebring12Hrs. I've reworked the image and improved the sharpness/noise (Topaz Denoising and Photoshop) along with other improvements (perspective, crop, WB and curves). What do you think? Poco a poco (talk) 17:44, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok thank you for your edit on the picture. I don't know if it is a best version. It seems to be a little bit more detailled, but I'm not sure. Feel free to cancel if you want (is this blue appeared realistic or not ?). Considering the comment of Daniel Case, I switch my vote to a comment. Have a good day. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 18:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Silene flos-cuculi flower - Niitvälja.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2022 at 14:33:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Caryophyllaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 14:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 14:33, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely. I like the dew drops on the petals. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 16:42, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 03:45, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 05:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have tried to photograph that charming flower myself, but it is so tiny and fragile that I did not succeed at all. Thank you for providing to us a great photo of this little gem! --Aristeas (talk) 08:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:01, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice light -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:14, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:29, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:10, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Clouds over Grand Canyon.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 23:34:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Arizona
Info View from South Rim near Yavapai Point into Grand Canyon, Arizona, USA. All by me. -- Wolf im Wald 23:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 23:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Hazy, unfortunately the light is not compelling. Bland colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:24, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is of course an amazing view, but this is the kind of motif that cries out for a panorama. Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much of the landscape appears flat, and the WB is too cool. Daniel Case (talk) 02:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Hazy and an unremarkable image of something that's remarkable IRL. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral For me this is a great photo because of the contrast between the incredible landscape and the wonderful clouds, but the light and colours spoil it, sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 11:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for your review! I am not very happy because of the flat light too but I thought it‘s a nice view with the clouds. -- Wolf im Wald 02:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Luz Station, Sao Paulo.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2022 at 01:35:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Metro_stations
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 01:35, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the slice of life, including the guy with the Santa hat and shorts in a tropical zone. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:54, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, it’s nice, but I can’t see much special here. Just an ordinary scene in a railway station to me in harsh light, and 11 megapixels is not an extremely high resolution either. Red channel looks oversaturated (all the red clothes of the people on the opposite platform). --Kreuzschnabel 08:15, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Its not a "harsh light" just a cloudy day, however, the interior of the station is quite dark compared to the exterior and it is normal that the exterior has to be exposed a little. I could have done an HDR with a tripod to mitigate this situation, it's the only solution I can think of
- "11 megapixels is not an extremely high resolution either". There is a difference between the resolution and the size of the image as well, 11.3 although it is not a high resolution the image conserves more than 300 pixels per inch, finally I don't think it's necessary to see the skin pores here. This is an Aps-c and I had to crop the image to get a better frame
- "Red channel looks oversaturated", its not and you can use the red train how reference searching it on google, in brazil people dress more colorful
- "I can’t see much special here, Just an ordinary scene in a railway station, s not an extremely high", It is a non-technical and personal opinion full of exaggerated adjectives, it is your opinion and I respect it. From my point of view this is a live photo and should not be evaluated with the same standards of a static object and full frame cameras, additionally there is the factor of developing country which should also be taken into consideration.

Thanks for your feedback --Wilfredor (talk) 12:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Yes, there is nothing on a pure aesthetic level that makes this an FP, for me ... no visual pattern, no leading lines, whatever. But it is nominated as street photography and on that basis it succeeds overwhelmingly. This is a train station in one of the largest cities in the country in question during a major holiday travel period—of course it would be busy, and that is what this image is showing us ... so many people, so many separate stories. I particularly like the women just a little bit down the platform, clearly posing for a picture to be taken by another woman we can barely see. What are they doing? Are they off somewhere, or at the end of a visit?
I also like that the roof, from what we can see of it, looks almost exactly like the roof of Milan's Centrale station, which so struck me upon my arrival in that city for Wikimania 2016 that I had to stop and photograph it. Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are some good points being made here. I'd consider the young man on the left and the train the most recognizable points of interest in this shot. Playing around a bit, I think the whole thing could be strengthened by a tighter crop (below the top "Plataforma 3" sign and at the right, keeping the same aspect ratio). Most of what's going on on the right is secondary to the main POI's and I really don't miss the arches once they're gone. That would also strengthen the rails, platform edge and floor markings as compositional elements. El Grafo (talk) 10:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not perfect, but something new, at least... --Yann (talk) 19:08, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
moral support for doing something fresh (by FPC standards). --El Grafo (talk) 10:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm glad this photo exists and I'm sure plenty of people will find a use for it, but it seems a bit too much like something anyone could duplicate by walking into a train station. Excellent image quality and good composition but not outstanding for me Cmao20 (talk) 19:50, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 12:39, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red-vented bulbul at Kairwaan Goan, district Dehradun.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2022 at 05:23:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
Info all by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The bird is looking away so the beak is not in focus. Were you using a tripod? 1/200 sec too slow otherwise. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp Yes, the beak is not is focus. Oh, was I supposed to use a tripod at 1/200 sec for 400mm I didn't know that. Thank you. I will try that next time. -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 06:46, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The guideline for handheld is minimum 1/400 sec for 400mm; With my 400mm I usually have it set at 1/1000 sec on TV (shutter priority). Of course there are many circumstances where AV (aperture priority) is better. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --Satdeep Gill (talk) 06:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tallinn asv2022-04 img76 StOlaf Church.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2022 at 12:45:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Estonia
Info St. Olaf's Church, Tallinn at evening Blue hour, all by me --A.Savin 12:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:45, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:54, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lovely image until you look at the upper steeple. Also noisy at the sides, with what seems to be a little distortion. Daniel Case (talk) 02:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel's remark on the steeple. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:31, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Daniel. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:30, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice blue hour atmosphere. At the first glance I thought that the steeple was heavily distorted. But when I compare some undistorted photos of the steeple, e.g. this one, it becomes clear that this steeple is actually extremely slim and hight, so this view adds only little (and, from this point of view, unavoidable) distortion. For me this is OK. --Aristeas (talk) 14:20, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I love the church and the blue hour colours here but I feel like the street is a lot less attractive than the church at the end of it. Cmao20 (talk) 19:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 17:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Starkstrommast P1300643.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2022 at 12:22:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Germany
Info created by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 12:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- John Samuel (talk) 15:21, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow for me and too noisy.--Alexander-93 (talk) 18:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Mesmerizing to me, but could you decrease the noise (which is not terrible to me) a little and fix the FP category link above? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:45, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I've looked at this for a while and I just don't see it. There are too many clashing and intersecting lines and shapes that aren't completely centred in the frame. I see what you were going for but I don't find it a fully satisfying abstract Cmao20 (talk) 00:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Alexander and Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 03:00, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose way too noisy. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Fischer.H (talk) 16:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Garranos fight.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2022 at 10:34:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Equidae (Equids)
Info created and uploaded by Norbertoe - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 10:34, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:34, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing. Such a beautiful shot. Looks like it's from another world. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:26, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, it’s amazing. Pity it’s oversharpened as well. --Kreuz schnabel 12:11, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shot. Gyrostat (talk) 16:43, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:39, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:06, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Kreuzschnabel & Satdeep Gill -- Wolf im Wald 22:07, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:08, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This wouldn't have been an easy take. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:07, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 06:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Compelling image and composition, and quality is good enough IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:57, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support But the image very sharpened, and why the horses fighting. Maanshen (talk) 08:41, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are right... The image is oversharpened. I did't notice that at the time of editing...

These are Iberian wild horses (known as Garranos), in this situation a solitary male is trying to steal the females from the other, so they fight and bite each other! :) Norbertoe (talk) 11:24, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak support~~ Support Amazing photo, it’s just a pity that the plants and rocks at the bottom are quite oversharpened. --Aristeas (talk) 09:15, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
You are right... The image is oversharpened. I did't notice that at the time of editing... Norbertoe (talk) 11:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Norbertoe It would be great if you could upload a new version with reduced sharpening. I love the shot, but those haloes keep me from supporting. El Grafo (talk) 14:47, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know how the previews and smaller size images are generated but the full size image looks much better than this preview... Norbertoe (talk) 15:21, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the previews of JPG files get some additional sharpening that exaggerate existing over-sharpening. I was referring to the full-size image, though. The plants in the foreground also look a bit weird to me at 100%. On the other hand, less sharpening might make it look soft at screen size. Your call ... El Grafo (talk) 10:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Is it possible to upload a new version and replace the actual file? how can I do that? :) Norbertoe (talk) 15:26, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes it is, it's just a bit hidden: On the file description page, scroll down to the file history and click "Upload a new version of this file". Or just click here El Grafo (talk) 16:20, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you!!! I made some adjustments, less processing and of course less sharpening. Hope it looks better now!! Thanks!!! :) Norbertoe (talk) 18:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Norbertoe, thank you very much for the new version! IHMO the photo looks much more natural now. I have changed my vote to full support. And thanks to El Grafo for explaining how to upload a new version! --Aristeas (talk) 09:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
... and it doesn't even look any worse at screen size. Have my Support! El Grafo (talk) 10:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you both for you help and support!! :) Norbertoe (talk) 10:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:07, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:20, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:54, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per Kreuz. Support Better now. Daniel Case (talk) 17:00, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Daniel Case Uploaded new version with overshapening corrected! :) Norbertoe (talk) 10:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support considering the shortcomings mentioned above. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:03, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree, not the best processing but a great capture anyhow Poco a poco (talk) 20:03, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:12, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I guess it would have been great with no postprocessing at all. -- Ivar (talk) 11:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know if it is possible to upload a new version of the file... When editing i used an old screen and didn't notice the oversharpening... Now I see it is exaggerated and even worse on the previews... Norbertoe (talk) 15:32, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:57, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 00:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Magnificent. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:34, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:56, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 09:59, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Was probably "weak support" before, but the new version is full support. Great shot. Daniel Case you may want to check it again -- the uploader has a second version. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:04, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 29 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:14, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Equidae (Equids)

File:Memorial to the victims of Communism, Prague 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Oct 2022 at 13:14:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Monuments and memorials
Info created by - uploaded by - nominated by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:14, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:14, 23 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support good contrast -- Wolf im Wald 03:01, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:59, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery link improved. Your friendly gallery link service ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is a decent photo but the shadow, mainly on the shoulder at right, and the burnt areas are disturbing. --Cayambe (talk) 16:19, 24 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sadly I have to agree with Cayambe. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:29, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works like an environmental portrait: the photo emphasizes the frontmost statue, but still hints to the complete monument in the background. With this subject high contrast is OK for me, the shadows add some drama to the statue’s face and I can still see many details in the shadows. --Aristeas (talk) 14:30, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree, light is not so good. --Mile (talk) 16:21, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Good idea but light is just too harsh. Could be much better with an overcast sky, or backlight. --Kreuz schnabel 16:56, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. Love the spider. Daniel Case (talk) 20:12, 25 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 15:02, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very in-your-face and somewhat disturbing, and that helps it work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I wouldn't go so far as to call for an overcast day, but I think a bit less contrast on the subject would help. --El Grafo (talk) 10:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per other supporters. Again and again during reviewing I am caught by this picture. The destroyed figures in the background make the whole scene. Great concept of the monument. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I support this photo for what it is, but the photo you linked seems to me to present a clearer depiction of the overall feel of the monument. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:03, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for your comment, Ikan. This photo made me curious about the monument because of the strong facial expression and the figures visible in the background. By linking to any example image, I wanted to point out the overall impression and expand/underline my reason for support. Equally as well I could have linked to the category. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 10:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Monuments and memorials
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 12:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @El Grafo, Kreuzschnabel, PetarM, SHB2000, and Cayambe: Any thoughts on the alternative image here? --Satdeep Gill (talk) 12:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose For the same reason I gave above. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:49, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The other version with more contrast affects me more. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:13, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Creeping daisy flower.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 13:43:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Flowers
Info created by Saankav - uploaded by Saankav - nominated by Saankav -- Saankav (talk) 13:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Saankav (talk) 13:43, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only 2 Mpx. Very small image. Possible to upload the full resolution? Also Commons:Quality images candidates is usually a good start before nominating here. Currently uncategorized image -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:57, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not an outstanding image for me, sorry. Shallow DoF, small size, bit on the dark side, uninteresting composition. Plus what Basil said. Have a look at recently featured flower pics to get an idea of your competition. --Kreuz schnabel 15:15, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kreuz. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:36, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above - sorry but per Kreuz doesn't measure up to recently featured flower pics Cmao20 (talk) 20:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Very dull, dim light and I'm not sure .PNG is at all the best format. Per Basile, I note that until I added some it was completely uncategorized—not at all what we expect in an FP nomination. Given that in less than 36 hours it has racked up five opposes against zero supports beyond the nominator, I suggest that it's time to withdraw this nomination. Daniel Case (talk) 22:30, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose I don't usually use "strong oppose", but I'm going to have to here. This image is nowhere near outstanding, ridiculously small, uses a png format, very dark, has an uninteresting composition – not even a QI, sorry. I'll probably stop rambling now. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:16, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:South facade of Dôme des Invalides.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 13:26:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info created by Maksimsokolov - uploaded by Maksimsokolov - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Paris 16 (talk) 13:26, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment That's a lovely light. I hope someone can remove the barriers and cords on the right :( - Benh (talk) 16:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and please don't remove the barriers and cords from the picture. They're there, and they don't ruin the picture, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing light, colours and mood. (At the first glance it may irritate that the façade is in shadow. But I can still see all details, and the shadow emphasizes the golden shine of the dome even more. So this photo is a good example that even with a façade in shadow excellent photos are possible – congrats, Maksim!) --Aristeas (talk) 07:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per others. And per Ikan, do not remove the barriers please. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:42, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support and +1 to keeping the barriers and ropes. Daniel Case (talk) 14:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe a bit oversaturated for me but still very beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 20:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 00:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the symmetry! --SHB2000 (talk) 06:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:54, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 18:45, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per other supporters. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:59, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support There is a dust spot in the sky (see note) --Llez (talk) 06:13, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:15, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Templo de Karnak, Luxor, Egipto, 2022-04-03, DD 144.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 20:00:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures_outdoors
Info Statues of Amun ram, Karnak Temple, Luxor, Egypt. The god of Amun came to be identified with the solar god Ra and the god of fertility and creation Min, so that Amun-Ra had the main characteristic of a solar god, creator god and fertility god. He adopted, among others, the aspect of the ram from the Nubian solar god. The Karnak temple complex hosts the Precinct of Amun-Re, constructed during the reign of Senusret I (who ruled from 1971 BC to 1926 BC). c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:34, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another classic motif, well captured and a real improvement for our collection. --Aristeas (talk) 07:10, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 18:33, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing resolution and detail Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Cmao. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:48, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Isiwal (talk) 22:31, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:06, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:28, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:52, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:14, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 08:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Palazzo degli Stati Provinciali in Gorizia (3).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 11:37:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Italy
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:37, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Where is the wow? --SHB2000 (talk) 12:16, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per SHB2000. -- Karelj (talk) 15:03, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose QI but not FP, there is nothing wrong with this photo but it's neither a hugely interesting composition nor under especially compelling light Cmao20 (talk) 20:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 22:10, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Poster for The Geisha.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 23:25:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic media/Entertainment#Music and Opera
Info created by unknown artist for David Allen and Sons, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:25, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice artwork, interesting because it captures the European (British) interpretation of Japan in a single image, and excellent restauration. --Aristeas (talk) 07:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Aye. It's very, very orientalist, but important to the development of musicals. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:55, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:10, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:31, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:15, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not as huge as some posters, but it looks good at a tad larger than life size on my 22.5-inch monitor. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 06:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Oman Khanjar.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2022 at 07:45:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools
Info created & uploaded by Richard Bartz - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The wow factor isn't easily noticeable at first, but it is quite a nice image. I don't think I've ever seen so many tools scattered in one place like that. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:09, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:17, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per SHB2000. --Aristeas (talk) 05:45, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:16, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:52, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Truppachtal Erlen Schnee-20190204-RM-173136.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2022 at 20:21:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
Info I think the effective use of leading lines, the dramatic and atmospheric effect of the mist, and the contrast between cool and warm colours, combine to elevate this beyond 'just another sunset'. created by Ermell - uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great; this photo was already on my favourites list, and I return to it from time to time because it’s so atmospheric and refreshing. --Aristeas (talk) 11:00, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:22, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SupportThanks for the nom. Cmao20--Ermell (talk) 19:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:56, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Even though I prefer landscape 3:2 Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:15, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. I would add, though, that I do not personally consider this "just another sunset" because it's not really a sunset but a dusk, since the sun itself is not visible, a distinction I have been making for quite sometime in my categorizations. Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support splendid composition --Virtual-Pano (talk) 18:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:55, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:45, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Beinn Narnain, Arrochar Alps, Scotland 09.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2022 at 20:21:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United Kingdom#Scotland
Info A dramatic photo of a Scottish mountain. Has been on my list to nominate for a while but I wasn't sure if you'd find the motif sufficiently unique, however I like it enough to give it a try anyway. I enjoy the contrast between the rich green, brown and ochre colours and the cool shades of the sky, as well as how the mountains seem to carry on endlessly into the distance. created by Podzemnik - uploaded by Podzemnik - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:26, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:02, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The beauty of sparseness. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:07, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A splendid view. --Aristeas (talk) 10:58, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:08, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 13:15, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:11, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:17, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 10:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:16, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looking at this I can practically hear the bagpipes and taste the single-malt. Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful light -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:47, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United Kingdom#Scotland

File:Herbst in den Berchtesgadener Alpen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2022 at 13:03:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info Classic view into the Berchtesgaden Alps in autumn. All by me.-- Milseburg (talk) 13:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 13:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful composition, mist and autumn colours, maybe my favourite pic on this page atm. Cmao20 (talk) 14:21, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 18:40, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lupe (talk) 19:20, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is really best scrolled through at full size, to enjoy the textures, colors and light. You and Moroder are among the photographers who capture the textures of snow-capped mountains really beautifully. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:42, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Virtual-Pano (talk) 21:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful; per Cmao20 and Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 05:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:58, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:57, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per other supporters. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:52, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:08, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome scenery. Category:Sea of clouds in Germany added -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 07:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Laitche (talk) 08:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captivating view. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:14, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:47, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:54, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gorgeous... -- Terragio67 (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Традиционална куќа во Бучиште.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 23:48:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info All by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:48, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:48, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this building needs a better light to be remarkable. And the left side is a bit blurry -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:14, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Basile. I think this interesting motif could be featurable, but not under this dull and flat light. Cmao20 (talk) 19:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Cmao20. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:05, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination I can't change the light. It's just how it was that day.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Carnival in Malta.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2022 at 08:53:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created and uploaded by Bellina 09 - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 08:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:53, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice but quite small. I would support with a larger version. Yann (talk) 09:47, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The photographer has recently been active in Commons, I asked a question about this in the discussion page. -- IamMM (talk) 10:22, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Of course a larger version would be really nice, but for me it is good enough in this version to support.--Kritzolina (talk) 19:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Splendor of colors that wonderfully emphasizes the face. Pity about the low resolution. Nevertheless, it is with about 4 megapixels above the minimum requirements. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:58, 26 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Yann -- Wolf im Wald 03:54, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this camera can take 36 MP photos. 4 MP is way too low. -- Ivar (talk) 06:35, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Weak support I have admired this photo when I was part of the jury for WLF 2022, I still love it, but the size is a problem. It would be wonderful if we could get a higher resolution! --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 27 September 2022 (UTC) – I meant weak support, sorry; fixed. --Aristeas (talk) 04:51, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others – size does matter here. Additionally, I don’t like the face centered – I’d love to see a bit less on top and a bit more below. Then, even if the vivid colours are natural, the red channel is blown. This is where the purple parts turn blueish-gray. Always a problem with intense colours, Red frequently blows first. (Now I checked the single colour channels of the original file: Blue is also blown in many places. Red is widely full white without any detail.) --Kreuz schnabel 15:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:02, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support weak only because of the size, otherwise brilliant Cmao20 (talk) 19:59, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kreuzschnabel. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:23, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose quality and size are things I could potentially get over, but the position of the head feels somewhat awkward, and the facial expression does not really match the occasion. --El Grafo (talk) 07:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per El Grafo. —kallerna (talk) 13:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ryan Hodnett (talk) 09:08, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:16, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:20180923 UCI Road World Championships Innsbruck Women's TTT Team Valcar PBM DSC 6528.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2022 at 15:50:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other_team_sports
Info created & uploaded by Granada – nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:50, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 15:50, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info This is a great image and I'd love to support this nomination. In particular, I like how you included the background, which provides context. @Granada: would you consider lifting the shadows a bit and increasing the overall brightness? I had a similar issue – after years of doing my postprocessing work on MacBook Pro screens, I realized that they were brighter than most other screens. Are you working on a Mac? The image looks slightly dark. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:17, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question I'd like to support too; the detail of the past injuries to the riders' legs is excellent, as is the background. But the colour balance seems off. I moved my slider from blue to yellow and prefer the result.Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you @ Ivar for nominating this photo. The lighting conditions on this particular day in the austrian alps near Innsbruck were very difficult and I remember having to intensively play around with the knobs in Lightroom. Back then I was using an old HP Laptop that's been old back in 2018 with a terrible display. Most of the time I don't touch the colours as I know that I cannot trust the screen, here this clearly went wrong. When I'm done reviewing the Tesla AI-Day I'll take a look at the image and if I could do something about the colours. --Granada ([[User talk:Granada|

Info I am inconsolable, but I've lost the original image. It's really strange, as I have most of the images taken at that event on my NAS, but there's a gap between pictures named DSC_6504 and DSC_6576 which I cannot explain. As mentioned the lighting conditions that day were difficult and therefore I've shot in RAW. Taking the developed version of the RAW and fiddling around with the colours is not what I want to do, so the image should be FPXed. --Granada (talk) 06:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info Frank Schulenburg, Charlesjsharp, Granada: new version uploaded. -- Ivar (talk) 07:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Let's wait for Granada... Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:12, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info Daniel Case, Charlesjsharp, SHB2000, I'm fine with the nomination. It seems that many reviewers like the image and the composition and if the white balance is now okay - so why not? --Granada (talk) 08:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. I would support it, but first we need to know whether Granada authorizes this version and its nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 14:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition, the background is as interesting as the main subject. Cmao20 (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:55, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain pending what Granada says. Daniel Case (talk) 03:11, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20, now that the author has agreed. --Aristeas (talk) 10:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:50, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:39, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ovenbird (90497).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 11:44:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Parulidae_(New_World_Warblers)
Info Ovenbirds (Seiurus aurocapilla) are one of the only primarily terrestrial new world warblers, and they're pretty cute. They walk around on the forest floor looking for food, build nests on the ground that look like old ovens, and have proven very difficult to photograph (they're skittish and seem to only rarely come into the light). Hid behind a tree to get this one. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 11:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 11:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:14, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:34, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very pretty and good quality, too. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:23, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support superb Cmao20 (talk) 21:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, in part considering the level of difficulty and composition, and also, this bird is small per w:Ovenbird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 11:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:21, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The background works with it because it shows how the bird's markings reflect its environment. Daniel Case (talk) 04:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:05, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dinkum (talk) 13:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Very nice and sharp except for a few patches of feathers. How did that happen do you think? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- How? I don't know. Less definition there in the raw file, too. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 11:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 12:38, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:01, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:42, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Bloem van een Astrantia major 'Roma'. 24-06-2021 (actm.) 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 15:00:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Apiaceae_(Carrot_family)
Info Flower of an Astrantia major 'Roma'. Focus stack of 18 photos.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I really like the picture but there are some focus stacking errors (see image notes). -- Wolf im Wald 19:11, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. correction Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Charlesjsharp. There are still many focus stacking errors as I had already criticized. -- Wolf im Wald 20:01, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I don't see much difference, but I like the photo. You might add the approximate diameter of the flower. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The diameter is Diameter~38 mm and I have added a note to the photo. Thank you for your vote.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:21, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 07:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 07:39, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Focus stacking problems all over. You need to retouch the leaves behind the stamen. See Ivar's nomination below. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New version. Thank you for your comment.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:53, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not sorted yet, I'm afraid. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Still opportunity to rework the stack. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:54, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question where do you think the problem is?--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:56, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you zoom in on each stamen you can see that the leaf behind is blurred. There is no leaf texture so you have to manually select from one image in the stack or clone from a bit of 'in focus' leaf to make it look right. It will take you a long time. There may be a better way to do it, but that's what I do on any stack where the background is part of the subject and is in a different focal plane. If you look at Ivar's nomination closely you will see what I mean. On his, there are no large patches of blurred flower. He may use a better technique than I do. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:24, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Ermell (talk) 18:36, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I wish the crop were not so tight at the bottom, otherwise great stuff Cmao20 (talk) 20:04, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral There is this halo all around the flower which I am not sure is natural. Daniel Case (talk) 22:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The crop is a tad too tight, but it doesn't really bother me. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:07, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:12, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:13, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:05, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Apiaceae_(Carrot_family)

File:MKr09180 Salzbachkanal (Wiesbaden).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 14:28:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info The historic Salzbach canal under the Wilhelmstrasse, Wiesbaden, Germany, shown at the point where the Wellritzbach and Kesselbach flow into the Salzbach. Created and uploaded by Martin Kraft, nominated by me --Aristeas (talk) 14:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Support I guess this will be a contentious nomination. ;–) The sewerage system is one of the most important parts of modern towns, but often ignored. And indeed it is hard to take appealing photographs of it. This WLM contribution has immediately fascinated me: Given the difficult circumstances, the technical quality is very good; the depicted point has been selected carefully, featuring the confluence of two tubes; and I like the composition with its strong depth effect. --Aristeas (talk) 14:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am fully with you on this one - difficult subject done extremely well! --Kritzolina (talk) 15:31, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 18:09, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 20:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking and unusual, a brilliant candidate Cmao20 (talk) 21:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others, much respect to the photographer, and I'm glad we can only see and not smell it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:35, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:08, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:21, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special in its kind. But I wonder why ISO 500 and f/5 while a tripod was certainly used (relatively long exposure) -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:37, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:38, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd have actually nominated rather this similar shot (focusing on the right) but this one is also nice. Poco a poco (talk) 12:47, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, it was a hard choice ;–). I agree that from an aesthetic/photographic point of view, the other one may be even more striking. I have nominated the present one because it seemes especially interesting to see the confluence of two tubes. But we could try to nominate the other photo, too – or are they too similar? Hard to tell … --Aristeas (talk) 08:11, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:15, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:36, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mosbatho (talk) 16:37, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support smelly but great! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:36, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:03, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 13:31, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Pomacanthus maculosus - Wilhelma 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 05:57:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family : Pomacanthidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 05:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:25, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:48, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There should be more space on the right where the fish is heading (or less on the left). Now the composition feels slightly unbalanced. —kallerna (talk) 12:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Question Like the proposition of the image note I made? But before cropping I would be glad to get more opinions to the crop. --Llez (talk) 15:16, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment Yes, the proposed crop is better. —kallerna (talk) 06:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 18:11, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:28, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:02, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:45, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- John Samuel (talk) 16:12, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:29, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 04:27, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maanshen (talk) 09:09, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:42, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish#Family : Pomacanthidae

File:Pompeii 2021 - 04 (Odeon).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 09:00:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Italy
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 09:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 09:00, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very good. Is that full size? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:04, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes -- Pudelek (talk) 09:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I would prefer for it to be bigger. I'll deliberate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:38, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support All it needs is Pink Floyd. Daniel Case (talk) 14:47, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support was nearly weak oppose but looking at it in full size, it's really quite striking. But I think the light is a bit harsh, maybe a different time of day would have been better; also it's the kind of photo that really cries out to be done through a panorama so that the frame isn't arbitrarily confined to the central portion Cmao20 (talk) 20:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The photo is impeccable for what it is, I also like the light, but i feel it would have benefited from a wider lens. --Micha (talk) 00:17, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The left is ridiculously dark and dull. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can't see why one would crop the sides. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:55, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Left side is too dark. NightWolf1223 (talk) 01:30, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per SHB2000. -- Karelj (talk) 10:42, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm still undecided on this photo, but I want to give it some love. The effect of this view is to really make the viewer feel like they are within the structure, and I think it's a stronger effect than would be likely if there were no crops left and right. The shadows also give the view a near-symmetry in the background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:41, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kaktusblüte IMG 2241.jpg, not featured, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2022 at 08:49:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Cactaceae
Info all by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 08:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 08:49, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fischer.H: Please fix the link to COM:FP above. Yann (talk) 15:23, 27 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:54, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful but I don't think the background, with what seems to be a big black artificial object, is FP level Cmao20 (talk) 20:00, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:13, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Distracting background with a black plastic pot just behind. Agree with Cmao20 -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. —kallerna (talk) 13:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 16:40, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Innenansicht Dorfkirche Hohen Neuendorf.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2022 at 08:24:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
Info created by Wieggy - uploaded by Wieggy - nominated by Wieggy -- Wieggy (talk) 08:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wieggy (talk) 08:24, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great at full size, except that I would expect the grayish windows to look more white - do they? - and there is some purple chromatic aberration to fix. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:01, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Stunning, you can almost read the holy bible ;-) - Je-str (talk) 09:30, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:33, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning. I agree with Ikan’s points and would suggest to fix them. --Aristeas (talk) 09:02, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! --SHB2000 (talk) 10:03, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:37, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Conditional support Looks good, although I cannot get the viewer to open it up. Daniel Case (talk) 17:10, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 22:01, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:06, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel. I tried several times with Panoramic Viewer, but unfortunately for this large file does not work in any known browser. So I have to rely on my power of imagination ;) -- Radomianin (talk) 10:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:20, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sympetrum flaveolum, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2022 at 12:07:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Side view
Dorsal view

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family_:_Libellulidae_(Chasers,_Skimmers,_Darters_and_others)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 12:07, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:07, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:48, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the set. I'm always amazed by the high quality results of your D850. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:13, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Truly extraordinary! How were you able to take 55 pictures of this dragonfly before she took off? How much time did that take? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek: and the side view needed even 176 photos (probably my record, that serie took exactly 3 minutes). Key element is timing (late evening) and cool weather. She was probably staying for the night on that place. -- Ivar (talk) 20:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:52, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing! --Satdeep Gill (talk) 03:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing side view. - Benh (talk) 07:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

+1 -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Awesome level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:10, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 13:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning. Dinkum (talk) 13:21, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:33, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:32, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really impressive what the D850 can achieve! --Granada (talk) 07:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree. Well, it’s not the D850 itself, it’s rather the photographer who can handle it … and understands what a good photo needs ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
+1. One doesn't need to look very far to find "questionable" photos taken with a D850. - Benh (talk) 17:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! -- Wolf im Wald 12:36, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:07, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Is it sharp ? Yes. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Are you using tripod to apply this technic? --Wilfredor (talk) 19:50, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Wilfredor: yes, for macro I have it always with me. -- Ivar (talk) 05:18, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Laitche (talk) 00:09, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:17, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family_:_Libellulidae_(Chasers,_Skimmers,_Darters_and_others)

File:Adu Kecepatan.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2022 at 07:41:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created & uploaded by HarfiBimantara - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:41, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great photo. Do the round numbers of the dimensions (3K x 2K pixels) suggest downsampling, though? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. It's a shame the head of the green guy is hidden, but the foreground is fine -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:29, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:09, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent find Cmao20 (talk) 20:06, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:52, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:05, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am not in favour of cruelty to animals Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:53, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Again a comment and vote unrelated to the quality of the image. PETA doesn't really care about animals, only making money and maximum buzz. Yann (talk) 18:37, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Basile. I take Charles’ concerns very seriously, I hate cruelty to animals, too, but I can still vote for a good photo documenting it. IMHO a bold hint that this practice means cruelty to animals should be added to the description of the photo. --Aristeas (talk) 10:56, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:57, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:14, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Colorful and dynamic. Daniel Case (talk) 19:16, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lupe (talk) 19:21, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:16, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Aristeas. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:35, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:18, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Anna Fernqvist, rollporträtt - SMV - H1 122 - Restoration.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2022 at 06:19:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Musicians_and_singers_performing
Info created by Ferdinand Flodin - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:19, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:19, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:27, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice, good restoration Ezarateesteban 21:09, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 10:58, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amusing posture. --Aristeas (talk) 08:15, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support And thank you for doing a complete categorization! Daniel Case (talk) 17:46, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Have to admit User:AliciaFagervingWMSE-bot did all the categorisation on File:Anna Fernqvist, rollporträtt - SMV - H1 122.tif already. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:06, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:19, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Yosemite National Park (CA, USA), Mariposa Grove of Giant Sequoias -- 2022 -- 2746.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2022 at 17:54:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#California
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 17:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 17:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe I am too jaded because I've seen a lot of these photos of clusters of trees looking upwards, but this one doesn't quite work for me. Quality is excellent as usual for you. But the big gaps of blue sky on left and right where there are no trees in the frame somewhat lessens the impact of being in the middle of the forest grove Cmao20 (talk) 00:06, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Checking the reviews of the last days (only one ... thank you to Cmao20 for your review and explanations). I think the photograph has no chance to become featured. --XRay 💬 06:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /XRay 💬 06:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:San Francisco (CA, USA), Alcatraz -- 2022 -- 3133.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2022 at 17:49:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United States
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 17:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 17:49, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I moderately appreciate the stairs but the fence not at all -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose. I sadly have to agree with Basile. The fence is an eyesore. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:53, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Checking the reviews of the last days (thank you to Basile Morin and SHB2000). I think the photograph has no chance to become featured. (BTW: The fence was the reason for own concerns.) --XRay 💬 06:48, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /XRay 💬 06:48, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Close wing Mudpuddling position of Phalanta alcippe (Stoll,1782) – Small Leopard (Male).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2022 at 16:03:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info created by Atanu Bose Photography - uploaded by Atanu Bose Photography - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:03, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Whereas your other nomination just about clears the bar for me, this one doesn't quite make it, because it has similar slight issues with technical quality but also a lower resolution. It is very beautiful though and I'm glad to have seen it but not quite FP to me Cmao20 (talk) 20:08, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support For me the beauty of the shot is more important than the slight technical issues --Kritzolina (talk) 21:13, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Kritzolina. –SHB2000 (talk) 06:03, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice shot, but insufficient detail in a small image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:49, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good light but the resolution is rather low compared to the similar pictures recently promoted here -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:01, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, our FP bar is quite high. -- Ivar (talk) 12:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good QI but lacks the outstanding sharpness for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:46, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 02:41, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose … and oversharpened. --Aristeas (talk) 05:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:21, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Close wing of Aemona amathusia (Hewitson, 1867) - Yellow Dryad.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2022 at 14:44:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info created by Sourabh.biswas003 - uploaded by Sourabh.biswas003 - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 14:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 14:44, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Excellent shot, beautiful soft colours and nice contrast between the butterfly and the background but I think it's at the upper limits of the noise I'd want to see from an FP butterfly shot Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful light --Kritzolina (talk) 21:12, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao and Kritzolina. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:45, 28 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:33, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 06:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Well short of FP for me. There is very little definition, particularly the head and feet. This cannot be compared with exisiting FPs. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:48, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice thumbnail but too noisy at full resolution. The details are missing -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:04, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Ivar (talk) 12:30, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Not detailed enough. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support On the one hand a delicate colour combination, on the other hand much OOF and some noise … --Aristeas (talk) 05:47, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support We should generally look for good sharpness, but other factors can make up for technical shortcomings. In this case, the light/composition is excellent, and it's not only the best photo we have of this species -- it's the only photo of a live specimen in this genus. I get that educational value only carries some folks so far at FPC, though. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:09, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a really good VIC argument, regardless of the results of this nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The detail level (specially the legs) is unfortunately clearly below the FP bar in my eyes, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 16:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Grainy... Per Basile. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:44, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:22, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Roubaix chez salah rue de tourcoing.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2022 at 18:17:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info created by Velvet - uploaded by Velvet - nominated by Velvet -- Velvet (talk) 18:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Velvet (talk) 18:17, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is really a good light, a dramatic sky and an interesting three-storey building, isolated here with such narrow dimensions. However, the ugly garbage bags at the right are so visible, they ruin the charm of the photograph, in my opinion. It's a shame to cut that part, but I think opting for a square format is the only way to get a satisfying composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Thank you for your review. It can be done, but the truth is that the picture doesn't have to be charming. Once surrounded by houses and industrial buildings, Chez Salah is the only building on a street in a former working-class neighbourhood in Roubaix, northern France, that has won the right in court not to be demolished. Still in use, it symbolises the resistance of immigrant textile workers in this area undergoing complete redevelopment.--Velvet (talk) 07:30, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting. In my point of view the charm is necessary, and this building in a deserted area has potential -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:01, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's a fairly compelling image, and the story makes the file even more compelling. Could you add that information to the file description? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:18, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thank you for your support. --Velvet (talk) 09:25, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Thanks. I don't think the rubbish adds something to the composition, so I would have preferred it out of the frame -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Has that certain something - Je-str (talk) 09:09, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good and useful. Yann (talk) 09:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support For me the garbage bags are part of the scene - and I find the scene attractive in all its "ugliness" --Kritzolina (talk) 09:47, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:22, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:48, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 13:01, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dinkum (talk) 13:20, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support according to Velvet's descriptions and Kritzolina's reasoning. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:23, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:29, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:27, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina Cmao20 (talk) 19:42, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 06:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive light, and I agree that the garbage adds something to this scene with its “lost world” aesthetics. --Aristeas (talk) 09:10, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special light. —kallerna (talk) 11:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It sort of reminds me of a couple of album covers: Ringo Starr's Sentimental Journey and, indirectly Led Zeppelin IV (i.e., the front and back cover combined). Daniel Case (talk) 18:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:08, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The light is what makes the picture special. In my opinion, the trash cans and garbage bags are as disturbing as the modern lantern. Maybe. Maybe they also emphasize the scene. But overall thanks to the statement of the image and the wonderful light there is a pro rating. --XRay 💬 10:45, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:47, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Templo de Nefertari, Abu Simbel, Egipto, 2022-04-02, DD 128-130 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2022 at 10:19:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Egypt
Info Interior of the temple of Nefertari, Abu Simbel, Egypt. The temple, also called Small Temple of Abu Simbel, was built about 100 m (330 ft) northeast of the temple of Ramesses II and was dedicated to the goddess Hathor and Ramesses II's chief consort, Nefertari. This was in fact the second time in ancient Egyptian history that a temple was dedicated to a queen. The first time, Akhenaten dedicated a temple to his great royal wife, Nefertiti. As in the larger temple dedicated to the king, the hypostyle hall in the smaller temple is supported by six pillars; in this case, however, they are not Osiris pillars depicting the king, but are decorated with scenes with the queen playing the sistrum (an instrument sacred to the goddess Hathor), together with the gods Horus, Khnum, Khonsu, and Thoth, and the goddesses Hathor, Isis, Maat, Mut of Asher, Satis and Taweret The capitals of the pillars bear the face of the goddess Hathor; this type of column is known as Hathoric. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 10:19, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 10:19, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:13, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 05:50, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 06:03, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Nice room but the photograph is not horizontal. Why are the stairs tilted ? -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

True, will upload a corrected version this evening CET Poco a poco (talk) 08:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking forward to seeing this new version, I may support once it's done -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:48, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it will be a straightforward fix. AFAICT the room lacks symmetry and Poco stood half-way between each row of columns, which IMO is the best compromise. The "tilted" stairs are because the far wall is not perpendicular to viewing axis. And since I'm here : Support - Benh (talk) 07:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I didn't manage it yesterday and will not be until tomorrow afternoon that I can export a new version. I ask for a bit more of patience. Poco a poco (talk) 09:04, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Basile Morin: New version uploaded where I applied a tilt and perspective correction, FYI, too Benh Poco a poco (talk) 17:26, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. Yes, I find this perspective improved. Captivating interior -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:57, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid I'm begging to differ. Now the right columns are leaning right. The first version is better in my opinion. Rather have the back wall leaning backward on the right side than columns leaning toward outside of the frame. - Benh (talk) 14:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Benh: I tried something out, is it better now? --Poco a poco (talk) 20:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This seems like the best version in terms of overall appearance, except that I wonder why you darkened it between the first and second versions. It's not a voting issue for me; I just wonder. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek, yes, I darkened it a bit because in the last rework I realized that it was actually too bright for a room without lighting and only a small door from where the light comes in. I would have usually reduced the exposure a bit more but I didn't want to make it a relevant issue to have to inform everybody here. Poco a poco (talk) 07:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd like to see the exposure you think is most true. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:12, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Here you are, Ikan Kekek. But I understand that so much darkening would have required a new nom or at least informing everybody here --Poco a poco (talk) 18:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'd support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:55, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captures the special interplay of light and shadow which (AFAICR) is typical for many Egyptian temples. --Aristeas (talk) 12:48, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:33, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:48, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:09, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:27, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:35, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 17:10, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Bloeiaren in ontwikkeling van Diamantgras. 04-09-2022. (d.j.b) 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2022 at 15:16:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Poaceae
Info Flowering spikes in development of Diamond Grass Calamagrostis brachytricha Focus stack of 16 photos. (Minimalist photography)
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:16, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:16, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellence in minimalism Cmao20 (talk) 00:22, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 05:53, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:06, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. In my opinion, some leading space towards the top right corner would improve the composition, though. As Alvesgaspar would say, "let the poor thing breathe!" --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:26, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Superb minimalism. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:48, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support minimalistic indeed, including the space given in the upper right corner --Virtual-Pano (talk) 14:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love it! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:20, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see here any reason for FP nomination, sorry. -- Karelj (talk) 21:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technically well executed, but I struggle to see what makes this special. This is not minimalism by my understanding of the word. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:21, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. —kallerna (talk) 12:58, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not all plants are photogenic. This is like shooting a blade of grass, in my view, and focus-stacking it. The technical work might be blameless, however the subject itself is rather unexceptional. Adding to this, the color of the background does not seem very natural to me: the paper is wavy at the top right. And the picture is mainly filled with empty space -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. I don't see any paper in the photo! and there isn't. According to (experts) these are colors that reinforce each other. So it has been thought about.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:41, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is no paper behind?? So there were in your previous nominations and not on this one?? Note added showing the apparently corrugated paper with dark areas and light areas. If it's not paper, this is cardboard or plastic, or something artificial, right? -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:26, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: there is no paper, cardboard or plastic behind it. Then assumptions are yours.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:38, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So, what is it?

...Yes, these assumptions are mine but you should be honest, too. This is not a natural background. We know this kind of artificial settings coming from you. Same aspect 🔍 now .

And this background with that color in particular we've seen many times already -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:34, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: we use a kind of decor, which is placed in the open air. We can use different colors in that. Before (the simple blade of grass in your eyes) but special grass can be photographed, we are a long time further.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:34, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please explain Famberhorst why 'a kind of decor' is not 'something artificial', which you have denied. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:18, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:44, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 20:36, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Poco a poco (talk) 15:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:00, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tawny coster (Acraea terpsicore) underside Phuket.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2022 at 21:32:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info We have one FP of this species. Female showing mating plug. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:32, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:19, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:06, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Oversharpened, suggest to reprocess. I find that, at or near default settings, Topaz and other AI tools are far too aggressive, often introducing i) artificial detail to sharp areas (e.g. wings) and ii) jagged edges to slightly out-of-focus areas (e.g. flower) --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ I kept silent because often it seems I am the only one who thinks that such photos are oversharpened, but now I have to second Julesvernex2’s comment. IMHO your photos would be even better with less agressive (noise reduction and) sharpening, Charles. --Aristeas (talk) 10:04, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It can be a matter of taste, but I am happy to reprocess. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New version uploaded Julesvernex2, Aristeas, at 50% of Topaz Denoise AI settings. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:09, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Big improvement, in my opinion: the "wormy" artefacts on the wings are gone, and the flower benefited from being excluded from the sharpening mask. This is indeed a matter of taste, but I would argue that we should err on the side of caution with images uploaded to Commons, as the final user can always add - but never subtract - sharpening. One last question: did you tweak exposure and saturation, or are the slight changes a result of the subdued Topaz settings? --Julesvernex2 (talk) 14:59, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I have no idea what I tweaked last time! I didn't make any adjustments this time. AS you see from the vote below, sharpening is not an exact science! Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:10, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank you very much, Charles, it looks much more natural in my eyes now! --Aristeas (talk) 07:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose IMO Not enough sharp for FP. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:54, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good, but quite small. I think our bar for butterfly-images is higher. —kallerna (talk) 12:57, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:46, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:06, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:38, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A good shot, but in the meanwhile I expect more sharpness and a better lighting for FP, on the other side the compo is good and we have only 1 FP of this species Poco a poco (talk) 15:53, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The top leg of the butterfly is visibly out of focus and is an essential part of the butterfly.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:39, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

True; well spotted Famberhorst. But is this an objective vote? I am curious how you can oppose this photo with its out-of-focus leg, yet support the pigeon nomination. Is the back half of the pigeon not an essential part of the bird? Please explain. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you think the top leg of the butterfly is really sharp, I approve the photo. it's your choice.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:23, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

What? I said above that the leg is out of focus. Please answer my question relating to the inconsistency of your voting decisions on the two animal FPCs. You must have an explanation; I'd like to know what it is. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:28, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: I don't understand that this photo with such an eye-catching blurry leg has so many pro voters. As for the pigeon. That is a completely different picture and not comparable. The head of the pigeon is nicely sharp and slowly turns into the blurry tail. I just want to close this discussion.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:29, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:18, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Pygmy cormorants (Microcarbo pygmaeus) Danube delta.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2022 at 21:47:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Phalacrocoracidae (Cormorants)
Info 16 cormorant FPs, but none of this species. All by Charlesjsharp-- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:47, 29 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:24, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question How big are these birds? Maybe I missed it, but I didn't see that info in the Wikipedia article. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:17, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Have added length 64-78cm to article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:39, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support IMHO the sharpening is a bit too strong (see the branches and leaves at the bottom, they look somewhat artificical), but here I can regard this as a matter of taste. --Aristeas (talk) 10:11, 30 September 2022 (UTC) Good now, see below. --Aristeas (talk) 08:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support the use of space and triple setup are working for me, even though Aristeas made a valid point --Virtual-Pano (talk) 13:55, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New version uploaded with 50% less NR and sharpening. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:01, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Even better now – thank you very much, Charles! --Aristeas (talk) 07:26, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose No wow, sorry. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:12, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good QI, but not enough good for FP, as above. -- Karelj (talk) 21:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, --Fischer.H (talk) 07:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Regarding wow: I really like how the 3 birds, looking in the same direction, sit on three similar bare branches. This looks like a careful arrangement and makes the photo special for me. --Aristeas (talk) 08:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I agree with you, but the birds aren't so small. Overall, though, I think they are sharp enough as a group of 3 with this good a composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like the composition very much but would appreciate if the halo around the birds would be eliminated. I see some highlights there. --Micha (talk) 11:31, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Namely, I fail to see where's the wow. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:20, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I wonder if the image can be brightened a bit ... I understand that the exposure and 400 ISO may have been necessary to get the image in the first place but is that an issue in post? Also, I think it could help to get rid of so much dead space atop the image ... maybe cropping from the top to about halfway between it and the birds? Daniel Case (talk) 19:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Too much empty / boring sky in my view. I would crop at least one quarter of the top -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:31, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cropped version uploaded... Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:05, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Much better, IMO. I think that's a big enough compositional change that everyone should be pinged. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:38, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've been asked to ping everyone because I cropped the top bit of sky. @Cmao20, Ikan Kekek, Aristeas, Virtual-Pano, Frank Schulenburg, Karelj, Fischer.H, Dan Mihai Pitea, SHB2000, Daniel Case, Basile Morin, and Iifar: Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:22, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support Although I understand Ivar below, I also think the gathering of three big birds like these is quite exceptional -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:50, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose sorry, but imo the birds are too far away from each other to make this compo work. -- Ivar (talk) 12:25, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Iifar. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:26, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Not going to make it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:41, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chariot from Dupljaja, Serbia, c.1300 BC (Bronze Age).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2022 at 08:38:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures
Info Chariot from Dupljaja, Serbia, c.1300 BC (Bronze Age). Handheld stacked image, my shot; size around 10 cm. -- Mile (talk) 08:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mile (talk) 08:38, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment First impression: Very interesting subject, but it feels too dark over-all and rotated ccw. Also, the shadow on the artificial background is inconsistent with the lighting situation on the subject. --El Grafo (talk) 09:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @El Grafo Did some rendering and rotate. I did much time to discover what color is best, i didnt not like too bright colors, even had one more black option than this. I know EN.Wiki like all on pure white back, but retina doesnt like that, you know in cinema they turn lights off. If you like any color let me see, code. Might try. --Mile (talk) 13:18, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Needs more rotation I think. And I wonder if it would have been better not floating in space? 16:36, 30 September 2022 (UTC)

Comment True and done (rotation). How is it floating in space if you see shadows ? --Mile (talk) 19:07, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

They are not realistic shadows as pointed out by El Grafo. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:49, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Regretful oppose per El Grafo. Daniel Case (talk) 19:42, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it, maybe I'd have chosen a different (brighter) artificial background but I still find this interesting for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:17, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:0118 GER Kiel St Nikolai crucifix.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2022 at 13:25:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info the mix of natural ( muted due to construction works) and artifical light combined with the frog perspective enhancing the features and ornaments of the cross - all by Virtual-Pano -- Virtual-Pano (talk) 13:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Virtual-Pano (talk) 13:25, 30 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:18, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A daring and refreshing way to depict a crucifix. I want to support it, but I am unsure about the level of noise removal; it seems a bit strong, making the corpus of Christ look a bit like plastic and damaging also the pattern on the ceiling behind it. How would the photo look with less noise removal? --Aristeas (talk) 14:53, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral exactly per Aristeas. Original idea and I like looking up at the crucifix, not something you see too often. But too much noise reduction for me. Cmao20 (talk) 20:08, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Info Aristeas & Cmao20- Noise reduction has not been applied at all. As for the strange ceiling structure and 'shiny' body surfaces, please compare with any other picture of this cruxifix as they show the same in these respects, imho.
  Here is my workflow on this picture:
  1st) cropping and perspective correction before uploading he first version of this frame
  2nd) saturation reduction for pillars and ceiling only
  3rd) mild sharpening of the very bottom carvings. --Virtual-Pano (talk) 22:23, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Support Thank you very much, Virtual-Pano, for your detailed answer! Well, the ‘shiny’ surface of the corpus etc. did look exactly as the results of strong noise reduction, therefore my comment. But when this is just how things are in reality, I am happy to support. — BTW: This is one of the most interesting contributions to WLM Germany in this year which I have seen so far, congrats! --Aristeas (talk) 10:59, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's something to the contrast between the warm tones of the crucifix and stark white of the background. However, while I appreciate experimenting with perspective, the composition doesn't work for me. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:22, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Aristeas. Daniel Case (talk) 03:09, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:45, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:47, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Excessive angle in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:53, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:19, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not good angle of photo view, per Basile. -- Karelj (talk) 09:00, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although the unusual angle of view, to which I am getting more and more used, this is a harmonious composition that I like also for the warm lighting mood of the crucifix in clear contrast to the vault of the church. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 21:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:La Blanche et la Noire - Félix Vallotton - 1913.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2022 at 04:38:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Nudes
Info created by Félix Vallotton - uploaded by Kirtap - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This oil on canvas by Félix Vallotton has its own entry on Wikipedia (in French). It is inspired by Olympia (Manet), and mentioned in famous newspapers. The painting belongs to The Metropolitan Museum of Art of New York City. -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Fascinating picture, but the image is very small for an artwork. Is there a larger one available? Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:29, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As this is clearly in the public domain worldwide, one should write to the MET, so that they provide a larger version. Currently there is a mention "Due to rights restrictions, this image cannot be enlarged, viewed at full screen, or downloaded." Yann (talk) 18:08, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it is public domain, today. And several other sources exist where to download the image freely, some of them are commercial (so one just pays the cost of the printing) -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:33, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. This artwork has 3,792 × 2,953 pixels, so 11,2 Mpx in total. It is not so small, considering the best professional Canon Camera in 2019 (year of upload) was the Canon EOS-1D X Mark II, with only 3648 px height. A small crop and that's it, one gets this size.

The last FP that was promoted in the same gallery was the Madonna (Munch) in 2019, and the picture had only 12,4 Mpx (3,109 × 4,000 pixels), thus very similar dimensions. Most of our FPs of nudes have comparable sizes, and some of them are even smaller, like The Luncheon on the Grass (Manet), only 3,167 × 2,459 pixels. I don't think a larger resolution of this painting can be found on the web in 2022, and if we get one it will certainly come from the museum -- Basile Morin (talk) 18:11, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good reproduction of a fascinating painting. The resolution is OK for me because the photo is very sharp. --Aristeas (talk) 10:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:30, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is clearly important as an answer painting, so it's cool that it'll be featured, but I wish the reproduction were bigger. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:20, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:36, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:32, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:40, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ralph Cleaver - 1904 amateur performance of W.S. Gilbert's Rosencrantz and Guildenstern at the Garrick Theatre, London - Image 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2022 at 11:59:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Ralph Cleaver - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:47, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. w:Bushey Heath Hospital is effectively a red link, though, so as a minor point, I'd recommend either starting a Wikipedia article about the hospital or eliminating the red link. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:12, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Looks like it closed in 1990 so I suppose its lack of an article isn't surprising. Historic hospitals aren't one of those things like historic railway stations that people actively work on covering unless they existed into wiki-times or were particularly notable. Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:20, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very interesting artwork; an ingenious way to arrange several characters and scenes in a single tableau … --Aristeas (talk) 06:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:55, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 16:33, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Common pigeon at Waterloo Park, London 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 06:45:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Columbidae (Pigeons and Doves)
Info created & uploaded by User:Satdeep Gill - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I know many people hate pigeons and consider them ugly (I do not), but hear me out on this: This is sharper for the upper half and then some of the pigeon than any of our existing Columba livia FPs, with the possible exception of File:Pigeon portrait 4861.jpg, which shows just the head and neck; it's a nice composition; and the pigeon has a characteristic posture and facial expression. I considered nominating this closeup instead, but I like this composition, with most of the pigeon showing, better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I hear you ;) --Kritzolina (talk) 07:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you so much for nominating this photograph, Ikan Kekek. I really appreciate this. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 08:26, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You're most welcome. It's one of the best photos of a pigeon I've seen so far. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:50, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The head is really nice, but much of the body is out of focus, the tail is partially hidden and very close to the bottom. For such a common bird, everything needs to be right. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:52, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Charlesjsharp. In particular, I'm not in love with the background on the bottom right. The tail partially hidden also bothers me. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:16, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality, but the background isn't perfect. —kallerna (talk) 12:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We have no perfect picture of Columba livia. Do you guys want to nominate all the other FPs of pigeons that are meant to be sharp pictures of a pigeon or part of one for delisting? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:24, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to see most of the common pigeons delisted. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:00, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question Which ones would you want to keep? I agree that we should have very high standards for Columba livia FPs, but I also think it's good to have FPs of common birds as well as uncommon ones. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Ikan. In the small preview on the white Wiki page the background appears a bit dark, but when I view the photo in full size, the background is good for me. --Aristeas (talk) 14:46, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:35, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom and Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:27, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pigeons are ugly, but this one is not. And I like the composition. Cmao20 (talk) 20:45, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Good picture of an ordinary pigeon with ugly background -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:45, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 17:32, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. -- Karelj (talk) 08:56, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:00, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 14:23, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Columbidae (Pigeons and Doves)

File:Porta San Tomaso in Treviso (2).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 11:39:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Italy
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 11:39, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A bit dark, I suppose. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:15, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Simple and effective composition. The light seems a bit boring, but it has the advantage that all parts of the Porta San Tomaso are nicely visible, without burnt highlights or black shadows. I would consider cropping the photo a bit at the right to get rid of the fragmentary person and of the fragment of the tree trunk. --Aristeas (talk) 14:49, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the muted colours and the serene composition. Maybe a tiny bit low on the wow, and I agree with Aristeas that the right crop could be improved. But sometimes 'beautiful motif and high quality photo' is enough for me to think it deserves a star Cmao20 (talk) 21:01, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very average composition. Intrusive branches at the upper right corner. Tight crop at the right of the bridge. There's an abandoned roof looking strange on the grass at the left. The light and sky are unexceptional in my view. Since the main façade is empty, the angle of view may not be optimum here. Overall I think this image does not stand out enough from the many bridges we have already -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with a lot of what Basile says, but mainly, I'd like to see light on the front of the gate and I'm also disappointed by the mesh over the front of the gate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Cmao. To me, if you think of this as an attempt to emulate in photography the qualities of a good watercolor, you will be satisfied. Daniel Case (talk) 04:05, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:29, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile, neither the subject/composition, nor the sharpness nor lighting are extraordinary IMHO, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 15:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile. -- Karelj (talk) 21:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light. —kallerna (talk) 11:59, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:01, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 14:22, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Artist busy in make up for Dashavatara folk theatre.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 11:51:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People_at_work
Info created by वर्षा देशपांडे - uploaded by वर्षा देशपांडे - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 11:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another impressive picture from WLF -- Kritzolina (talk) 11:51, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The background both to the left and right is distracting. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:13, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A photo which would fit very well into National Geographic and similar magazines. Very expressive thanks to the strong light/shadow contrast, and I am impressed by the artist’s concentrated posture. The technical quality is OK when we consider the difficult and dark situation and the resolution (the photo has not been downscaled). The background is OK for me because it is nicely out of focus and very dark. --Aristeas (talk) 14:40, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Aristeas has sold me on a photo again. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:38, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support +1 -- Radomianin (talk) 15:59, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 09:52, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:03, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:33, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. Daniel Case (talk) 17:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 14:21, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:BMW 507 Classic-Gala 2022 1X7A0188.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 18:06:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
Info created by Alexander-93 - uploaded by Alexander-93 - nominated by Alexander-93 -- Alexander-93 (talk) 18:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexander-93 (talk) 18:06, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Attractive light and nice composition with how the car is sort of framed by the plant pots. I don't mind the other cars in the background, seeing that this is at a classic car show it's pretty much expected and I think it adds rather than detracts from the sense of place. If it wasn't a classic car show I might not be so keen. Cmao20 (talk) 21:05, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:44, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The picture is of the car and the pot front left and its shadow distracts. Charlesjsharp (talk)
Oppose per Charles; also the color seems perhaps a little too subdued for late summer. Daniel Case (talk) 03:15, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh light and the framing is too large in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:31, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:04, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Winter wren on a tree (90538).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 22:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Troglodytidae_(Wrens)
Info Winter wren (Troglodytes hiemalis), tiniest of the wrens (about a third the size of a house sparrow). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:47, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:43, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The thumbnail version is nice but unfortunately it is not sharp. Dinkum (talk) 13:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- The sharpness could be a bit better. I nominated it considering the light, composition, and because IMO the sharpness is ok enough for the challenge of shooting this bird (tiny, hyperactive, often reclusive/hanging out in shady areas). I appreciate that this is not going to be sufficient justification for everyone, though. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:24, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per author's comments, good for a small and reclusive bird Cmao20 (talk) 19:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:04, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I like the way he looks like he's on the lookout for something ... Daniel Case (talk) 03:17, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 09:52, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:03, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:31, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 06:14, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Faro de Santa Marta, Cascais, Portugal, 2022-07-25, DD 13-15 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2022 at 23:09:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Portugal
Info Santa Marta Lighthouse, Cascais, Portugal. The lighthouse, which is 20 metres (66 ft) tall, is situated on the estuary of the River Tagus, providing a light for the Cascais Bay and for the town's new marina. It was built in 1867 after the Fort of Santa Marta, built in the 1640s, was considered in 1864 to be no longer militarily necessary. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 23:09, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 23:09, 1 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The water reflection is dull and distracting, IMO. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This picture needs more love, it is not your most immediately wow-y photo but overall I think it's a strong candidate. Extremely sharp even at 48 megapixel full size and some lovely soft, warm twilight colours. Cmao20 (talk) 19:32, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. Especially I like the soft gradation from cool colours on the left to the warm light on the right. --Aristeas (talk) 08:14, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Dullness of the reflection is due to the long exposure, without which this image could not happen. Daniel Case (talk) 17:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful in full screen view. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:17, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:04, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not so bad, reflexion on the water is interesting. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:47, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:31, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 06:15, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Shy Albatross with Mars bar, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2022 at 05:46:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Side view
Front view

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Diomedeidae_(Albatross)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 05:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 05:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the set. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:58, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A nice but regretful set. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:48, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per SHB2000 ! --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:30, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sad but impressive --Clément Bardot (talk) 09:03, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support though I would prefer the side view on its own. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:02, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:51, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:45, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support And Thanks for let the original noise in the image. It is important not to eliminate the noise that is information in the images (except logical extreme cases) --Wilfredor (talk) 18:42, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:10, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would support, but there are an awful lot of images in COM:Deletion requests every day for including copyrighted packaging. I'm afraid these photos will be nominated for deletion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:08, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Compare Category:Mars Bar: it's {{PD-textlogo}}. Regards --A.Savin 11:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great. Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:10, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly de minimis in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have a clear read on what is de minimis in what might be non-obvious situations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:10, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

See point #3 of the table "Copyrighted work X is identifiable, but is a small part of a larger work, so that the larger work cannot easily be shown without showing X. X is a part of the larger work, and its inclusion is unavoidable." => Considered "Very likely [OK] Ok" -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:41, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

+1 Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me about that useful chart. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:21, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:20, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual fish :-) Basile Morin (talk) 14:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:34, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 16:14, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support I wish they could be less noisy, but it may have been unavoidable and it is not so bad that I could not support. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gyrostat (talk) 12:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:31, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 13:38, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Common pigeon at Waterloo Park, London, United Kingdom 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2022 at 06:51:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Columbidae (Pigeons and Doves)
Info all by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 06:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 06:51, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:47, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 14:40, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Settings are good, but this is such a common bird it is too ordinary a shot Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:55, 2 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A tricky one, sharpness and light are good but we have this recent FP with more detail, I go for neutral Poco a poco (talk) 15:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That photo is of a different species of pigeon. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I much prefer the composition and background to the picture Poco links to. The resolution could be higher but still good photo Cmao20 (talk) 19:40, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Charles. This is so common that I fail to see where's the wow. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:04, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This one captures the iridescence not in the other FP. Besides it has a natural background. Daniel Case (talk) 17:51, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:07, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:32, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Only 2,346 × 1,566 pixels for such a common bird. Too small in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charlesjsharp. -- Karelj (talk) 11:56, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Columbidae (Pigeons and Doves)

File:Sarcelle cannelle (Spatula cyanoptera).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2022 at 09:01:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Spatula
Info Cinnamon teal (Spatula cyanoptera), Parrot World (France). All by me. --Clément Bardot (talk) 09:01, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 09:01, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:31, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Can you correct the tilt please? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:00, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done --Clément Bardot (talk) 07:00, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:08, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice image but I would say the tilt now is inverted. It's easy to check the vertical with the reflection (beak and tail). I think the right balance is somewhere between the 2 uploads -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I didn't think I needed to check again. Another go please. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think we're good now. Thanks --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:55, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:18, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:35, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:47, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:36, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:31, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 05:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:49, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Despite the fact that the poor duck is still swimming uphill. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:06, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Horizontal, now. Good light -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:18, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:30, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:30, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 13:40, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mangosteens - whole and opened.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2022 at 00:01:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits (raw)
Info Another interesting photo in this series of images of fruit. created by Ivar - uploaded by Ivar - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:29, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support thank you for the nomination, Cmao. This fruit is very tasty. -- Ivar (talk) 05:26, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent quality and arrangement. Looks like a masterpiece of Japanese craftsmanship (a netsuke or similar) to me … --Aristeas (talk) 06:38, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love this high-quality image! --SHB2000 (talk) 06:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice :) --PierreSelim (talk) 06:53, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 06:57, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Excellent as always, but small cloning error in shadow under right hand fruit. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:06, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ivar, can you tweak cloning error please. Shouldn't the two images be to scale? Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp these are two mangosteens together, not two different images. As for your note, it's just a part of the shadow, not a cloning error. -- Ivar (talk) 15:21, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ah! two different-sizes fruits. Thanks Ivar. But the shadow ends in a point which looks weird. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:10, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:41, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 16:13, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tastiest fruit ever :-) Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment When I was a child, manggis, as this fruit is called in Malay, was my favorite Malaysian fruit along with w:Rhodomyrtus tomentosa, locally called buah kemunting, whose berries I gathered from bushes near a graveyard. When I went back for a visit, the birds had already eaten the last of those berries, so I haven't tried them since 1977. Do you eat rose myrtle in Laos? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, but I'll pay attention to it, and I already made my own FP of this delicious subject :-) Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and I was happy to support it. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:21, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 05:33, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 05:43, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:48, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:17, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:29, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:58, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:13, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:30, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:46, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Fruits (raw)

File:Tartu asv2022-04 img17 Barclay de Tolly House.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2022 at 09:37:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Estonia
Info Barclay de Tolly House (Art Museum building), which is also known as Leaning house, in Tartu. All by me --A.Savin 09:37, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 09:37, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support No, the image is not tilted! Yann (talk) 09:44, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The only picture where perspective is not ok, but FP. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 09:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:25, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:50, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Virtual-Pano (talk) 20:56, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just old building, one of many similar ones, nothing extra for FP. -- Karelj (talk) 21:46, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very high-quality photo of this building, but the building isn't so spectacular that I consider this an FP in dull light, with a boring sky. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:15, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I really like the building, it’s just that the light is a bit boring … @A.Savin: Taking a look at the histogram I get the impression that the highlights are a bit too dark (the brightest 12% of the histogram are almost empty/unused). Maybe you could try to make the whites/highlights a bit brighter to use the full spectrum of the histogram. This would also increase the contrast of the photo and therefore make the light appear less “dull” and even the sky more interesting. I have tried it and IMHO it would be rewarding. --Aristeas (talk) 09:21, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the illusion of the tilt. The lighting could've been better, but it isn't distracting, FWIW. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light. —kallerna (talk) 11:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Light is pleasant for me. --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:55, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:46, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:08, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:13, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:25, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The fact it's leaning makes the building interesting in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 15:18, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The glass dome - Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II - Milan.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2022 at 14:59:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Italy
Info created by Terragio67 - uploaded by Terragio67 - nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 14:59, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:07, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd prefer a square crop so I can see the whole dome but still good Cmao20 (talk) 20:02, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see here any reason for FP nomination, sorry. -- Karelj (talk) 20:08, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- This shot was really challenging, you will find similar ones on the internet, but not so precise (or detailed) and not of this size (24Mp). --Terragio67 21:51, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This beautiful galerie deserves a better framed and exposed shot. The ceiling bar is very high here. I'm afraid this doesn't compare favorably to user:T meltzer's incredible work. - Benh (talk) 22:30, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad crops, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:11, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I see yours points of view, I don't want to change yours mind. I would like only to remark that the image has not be cropped using any manipulation software after the shot and that the octagonal dome is simmetric and IMO the hiddens parts shouldn't represent necessarily lost of information. --Terragio67 05:35, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's not what I mean by crop. Parts of the dome are effectively cropped out of the picture. My opinion isn't about a lack of information; it's about a loss of beauty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:03, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the framing is unfortunate. --PierreSelim (talk) 06:02, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral On the one hand this photo is well done and I actually like the crop. On the other hand Ikan is right that there is a “loss of beauty”. This photo (for example) is technically etc. not satisfying, but it shows how beautiful the complete dome would look. It also suggests that one can take a photo of the full dome with a 17mm lens on a full-frame camera (or 11mm on APS-C or 10.5mm on Canon APS-C). Not everybody has got such a lens, of course, but it is also not that exotic, there are also many zooms which cover that range. What I want to say: It is not extremely difficult to take a photo of the complete dome, therefore it is reasonable to wish for a complete image for FP. --Aristeas (talk) 09:52, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad crop, poor framing, and as Ikan mentions, there's a "loss of beauty". --SHB2000 (talk) 09:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the constructive suggestions, I'll treasure... --Terragio67 05:22, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Some Wikimedia chapters own some photographic equipment and lend it to Wikimedia Photographers for free; e.g. here is the list from Wikimedia Germany and Austria. Many people use this service to take special photos without needing to buy expensive cameras/lenses. I don’t know whether Wikimedia Italy has a similar service, but maybe you could ask them … and maybe it is possible to lean the gear from Wikimedia Germany/Austria for Italy photographs, too. Just as an idea. --Aristeas (talk) 13:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
And, sorry for not mentioning this earlier, you could also stitch a photo of the complete dome from several photos of parts of it. This way you don’t need an ultrawide-angle lens, and the result can be extremely detailled and sharp. There are several experts on Wikimedia Commons for stitching photos, for example Domob, Benh, DXR … contact them to learn more about this technique and how it would be applied best in the case of the dome. --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I appreciate your kind reply... Thanks a lot! You've spread really useful information. --Terragio67 02:41, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Having been there myself I completely understand the challenges of shooting in this space. And this photo acknowledges those challenges to make something better than I could have at the time. Daniel Case (talk) 02:50, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks Daniel, I wanted to try something different from others uncountable and beautiful images of the Milan glass dome, and I hope to try again, as soon it will be possible... (that place is amazing) --Terragio67 04:11, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Siegerrebe IMG 6784.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2022 at 16:16:46 (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) 16:16, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 16:16, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Fischer.H: Please fix the category above. Yann (talk) 18:49, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support We have surprisingly few FPs of grapes (I can only find two) and this one is beautifully lit and well composed Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The background is a mixture of bright and dark, making it distracting. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:53, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. I have changed the gallery link to point to the section which already includes the two existing grapes FPs. --Aristeas (talk) 12:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh light in my view, but the picture is worth the QI badge -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:01, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info As for the gallery, more featured pictures of grapes can be found under #Winemaking --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:24, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops – that’s an excellent hint, Frank! Question @all: Well, IMHO all grape FPs should be united on one and the same FP gallery page. What do you people think: Should we unite them (1) in the Plants#Family : Vitaceae gallery section or (2) in the Food and drink#Winemaking section? (Especially pinging Cart as long-time FP gallery page expert.) Best, --Aristeas (talk) 07:21, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the galleries should be merged. It's always tricky to draw the line in the food gallery. When does a plant, fish, animal, etc. cease to be that and become food? I have previously tried to sort things as food when it is ripe, dead, processed, prepared or whatever is needed for it to soon become edible. If we merge the two galleries mentioned above, we might as well merge all the raw fruit into the plant galleries, the dead fish and pig heads into the various animal galleries or place salt with the minerals. The three photos currently in the Plants#Family : Vitaceae gallery are 1) not yet ripe and mostly showing how the grapes grow on stems, 2) showing the grapes as part of the large plant, 3) showing only leaves. In a way, all galleries are subjective to what the photographer tried to convey with their photo. Does this photo here show the plant or the raw material for winemaking? --Cart (talk) 10:57, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, the galleries shouldn'd be merged. I'd add the image above to winemaking. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 12:02, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Cart – this is a very good explanation. I agree that according to this rule we would add the photo discussed here to the Winemaking gallery because it emphasizes the (almost) ripe grape; I have changed the proposed gallery link accordingly. Best, --Aristeas (talk) 12:45, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aristeas, another thing that differentiates photos of food from the plants or animals, is the style and way in which it is photographed. There is often a different set of "rules" when you shoot food, especially in modern food photography. Unfortunately, FPC has not really accepted this reality, which is why the FP food gallery is so small. It would be great for the project if people could read the Food photography article and perhaps spend some time online and with books about this huge and popular branch of photography. Also 'pinging' Frank, since I think he knows where I'm going with this. --Cart (talk) 16:44, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cart, thanks for the ping. Yes, increasing our knowledge in areas that aren't well represented here at FPC, has been on my mind for years. I strongly support the idea of people reading books about topics like food photography, as well as on other genres that are missing here – if someone is interested, but doesn't know which books to start with, please feel free to reach out to me. I've bought a lot of books about different genres of photography over the years (e.g. portrait photography, food photography, street photography, travel photography, conflict/war photography, conservation photography) and I'd be happy to provide recommendations if needed. With that being said, I've recently been thinking about doing some street photography and I'd be glad if I could find others who are interested and would like to join such an effort… Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:52, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Cart, thank you for the hint. I know about the peculiarities of food photography – my parents used to do, among other things, food photography –, but, as you say, this is not widespread among our community … Therefore I heartily second Frank’s wish to spread such knowledge. --Aristeas (talk) 09:22, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Strong oppose No wow, casual shot of fruits. At the limit of QI to me, because of motion blur at full screen. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:34, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Grapes not all in focus. Daniel Case (talk) 02:53, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dudley Hardy - Poster for His Majesty.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2022 at 21:58:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Dudley Hardy - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:58, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:54, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:54, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:28, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:46, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 18:07, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:03, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 05:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Shear Flow Vortices.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 04:57:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Others (?)
Info created and uploaded by KarlGaff - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 04:57, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:57, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Stunning. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 09:53, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was sitting there looking at the photo, reading the description and looking at the photo again. Very nice! --Granada (talk) 17:56, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:26, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 20:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:43, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:18, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A real artwork. --Aristeas (talk) 14:48, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 16:07, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like a great textbook or album cover. Daniel Case (talk) 03:04, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:49, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 05:48, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Angkor Wat with its reflection.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2022 at 09:31:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
Info all by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 09:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 09:31, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:26, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 16:41, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support serene photo of a famous motif Cmao20 (talk) 19:43, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Dust spot near the upper right corner. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:16, 3 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Ikan Kekek: I am surprised how you could identify such a tiny spot in such a large photo. Thank you so much for your valuable correction. I hope it's better now. I have also tried fixing a bit of the tilt. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 02:56, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support You're welcome. I see 3 more dust spots near the upper left corner. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Done Thank you so much for all the support. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:29, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Cmao20. Please fix the remaining dust spots mentioned by Ikan. :–) (Tip: It’s easier to find dust spots if you zoom to the full size of the image (1:1, 1 pixel of the photo = 1 pixel of the screen) and then move the photo slowly from left to right (or right to left) over the screen. It can also help not to focus your eyes directly on the sky but to look slightly besides the screen. Both techniques help me a lot to find dust spots etc. This has something to do with the anatomy and functionality of our eyes which perceive brightness/darkness contrasts and movements better in the border regions than in the centre of the field of view …) --Aristeas (talk) 09:33, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you. This is very helpful. I was able to identify one more dust spot towards the towards the upper right corner and fixed it. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:29, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you! --Aristeas (talk) 13:42, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Changed to oppose in order to get the other version promoted (which I prefer) – I hope this is allowed?! --Aristeas (talk) 05:28, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I know I'm in a different boat to everyone else here, but the salience should be on the temple and the other archeological sites. Instead, the first thing that my eyes are drawn to are the palm trees that surround and the rather distracting reflection. Not an FP, sorry. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:03, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Image consists mostly of empty sky. —kallerna (talk) 11:54, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 08:25, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Leaning to the left.--Ermell (talk) 21:54, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ermell

Done tilt fixed. -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:38, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per others. If I didn't know what this was, I'd have no doubt saying it was a good photo of an unremarkable building. I like clouds, blue sky and water reflections, and I've seen a lot better at lower technical quality. QI, yes, but FP, no. Daniel Case (talk) 23:15, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose< Tilted. Building leaning to the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:17, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Basile Morin Done tilt fixed. -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:37, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:47, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Too much empty sky and water, should be cropped to a wide aspect ratio. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@King of Hearts Done check the alternative below. -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose in favor of the alternative. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 11:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A bit more space below the reflection, maybe? And more light would be nice, because it seems slightly underexposed, now. -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:47, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
+1 the cloud should not be cut off. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:11, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Basile Morin, @King of Hearts Done I have updated this version per your suggestions.-- Satdeep Gill (talk) 03:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Fine now, in my view. As the end of the voting period is tomorrow, probably it's worth notifying everybody before the other version is promoted -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:32, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. That's a great idea. Let me ping everyone here. @Terragio67, @Kritzolina, @Cmao20, @Aristeas, @SHB2000, @Kallerna, @Karelj, @Ermell, @Daniel Case; I would like to bring this alternative to your attention as tomorrow, 12th October is the last date before the voting ends on this nomination. Thank you for your consideration in advance. -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 08:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support, without prejudice to the discussion above -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:05, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 08:06, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I'm undecided on this. The salience is still on the palm trees, but the photo does look nice. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:08, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support better. --Aristeas (talk) 13:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 15:36, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support better. Daniel Case (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I prefer the first version, but this one passes the mark for me as well --Kritzolina (talk) 17:48, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 05:47, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The chosen alternative is: File:Angkor Wat with its reflection (cropped).jpg

File:Havenwelten - Bremerhaven 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 05:40:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:40, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 05:40, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:04, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:43, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I expect this to be featured and don't want to be the only person to vote against it because this kind of architecture does not produce a good composition to me and most of what we see is an eyesore to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:03, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Ikan about the architecture (IHMO it is a boastful blot on the landscape), but I appreciate the photograph you have created of it. --Aristeas (talk) 14:51, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 16:06, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I wish that cloud weren't where it was behind the antenna, but we have so few FPs of Bremen IIRC. Daniel Case (talk) 03:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment And we won't have another one if this passes. Bremerhaven is about a 45-minute train ride or drive north of Bremen. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I have a hard time understandig what you want to tell us. Why is the distance between Bremen and Bremerhaven of relevance here? --Kritzolina (talk) 08:23, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just that Daniel shouldn't think this is a photo of Bremen. I'm an open book, so don't look for hidden meanings in my comments, because there aren't any. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

CommentThanks, I was confused, because like Daniel I sometimes don't read as carefully as I should. I will try and do better! --Kritzolina (talk) 17:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not a problem! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support This is the kind of photo the architecture was made for --Kritzolina (talk) 08:23, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Milseburg (talk) 12:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:35, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment WB seems to be off. —kallerna (talk) 11:44, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 18:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:20180929 UCI Road World Championships Innsbruck Women Elite Road Race 850 1119.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 10:25:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other_team_sports
Info Ivar's latest nomination reminded me of this. I've always liked it, it's the title photo of the event category and I finally decided to give it a try. This is the entrance to the old town of Innsbruck (I've had the "Goldenes Dachl" in my back) on the women's second to last round. The colors are on the warm side as it was taken in the afternoon end of September. All by me - nominated by Granada -- Granada (talk) 10:25, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Granada (talk) 10:25, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:02, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support very competitive! --SHB2000 (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:01, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:21, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:14, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 08:36, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Appealing point of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:50, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Also very atmospheric, a perfect main front-page photograph. --Aristeas (talk) 14:53, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 16:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:27, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, largely for the way it works as a news photo. Daniel Case (talk) 17:09, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:34, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:26, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 18:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Basílica de San Jorge, Victoria, isla de Gozo, Malta, 2021-08-22, DD 11-13 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 18:48:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Malta
Info Balcony, pipe organ and fresco of the Saint George Basilica, Victoria, Gozo Island, Malta. The St. George's Basilica, or San Ġorġ in Maltese, is a historic Baroque church situated in the Cittadella of Victoria, the fortified old town in the middle of Gozo, the second largest island in the Maltese archipelago, and is surrounded by a maze of old narrow streets and alleys. Today's basilica was built between 1672 and 1678. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:48, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support subtle use of HDR. --Granada (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 01:41, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:57, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:50, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support tbh it does look a little bit lacking in contrast to me, I'd like to see it processed with some deeper blacks. However the motif and image quality are easily sufficient for FP Cmao20 (talk) 20:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cmao20: I've increased the contrast a bit with the hope to increase your support without still having to ask everybody else for their opinion. Poco a poco (talk) 16:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I do think this is an improvement. Cmao20 (talk) 10:39, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:07, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:54, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 13:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Hellenic pond turtle (Emys orbicularis hellenica) Butrint.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 18:50:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Emydidae (Pond Turtles)
Info Near-Threatened turtle that can be found in the Greco-Roman ruins in Butrint, Albania. Butrint was abandoned because of a rising water table. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:50, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:50, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'd support a version with shallower depth of field. I find the background distracting. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

OK. New version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 01:00, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I like the new version much better. On the left – is that a second turtle behind the one in the front? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:04, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, there were three together. In the enwiki article, you'll see an image of many more but in a different part of the ruins. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:25, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support nicely taken. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:42, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:58, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:20, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice smile. The problem is that the DoF seems unnatural along the rock. The transition line is too obvious. The picture is sharp all the way then suddenly blurry. I think the evolution of the blur is not progressive enough. I know it's because one part is focus stacked, and not the rest, but unfortunately these two photographic choices (bokeh / high DoF) are not very compatible here. An unaesthetic "jump" is fatally identifiable on the background, and makes the image visually retouched. Incidentally, there's a minor halo on the right side of the shell -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:59, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It does indeed look unnatural. Charles, it should be possible to Photoshop your way to a smoother transition along that rock on the right. I would try using a gradient (with the turtle masked out) to progressively decrease the rock's sharpness from roughly the middle of the foot all the way back to the blurry section. Or maybe a blurring brush or cloning tool can also do the trick? Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:40, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. New version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:51, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Minor fix of the halo, but nothing concerning the DoF. First version better in my opinion. Background a bit busy but overall more conventional / natural aspect -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:34, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well! Who to please? 13:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Julesvernex2's challenging suggestion? -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:00, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've accepted the challenge, though it's a new process... Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like you have uploaded the previous version, Charles -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:48, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charles, I've had a quick go at it here. If you like the results, happy to guide you (and any others that might be interested) through the process so you can apply it to the raw file --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:25, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree Julesvernex2's treatment is more progressive, and the render subtle -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Julesvernex2 and Basile Morin. JVx2's version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:32, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:59, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:32, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:59, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks to Julesvernex2! I also like the exemplary cooperation between the two of you. --Aristeas (talk) 13:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family : Emydidae (Pond Turtles)

File:Marbled crab (Pachygrapsus marmoratus) Butrint.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 19:19:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Grapsidae (Marsh Crabs)
Info Three top-down/dorsal FPs and one front-on FP of this species - which I supported. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:19, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support very Charles... erm... sharp. Nice colours! --Granada (talk) 15:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:16, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:52, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:31, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:07, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:57, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. To be honest, the sharpening looks too strong in my eyes (as usual). But because everybody else seems to be fine with it, I am happy to take this as a matter of taste and to support the photo. --Aristeas (talk) 13:52, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral agree, sharpening is too strong for my taste. -- Ivar (talk) 14:52, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per Aristeas Poco a poco (talk) 17:09, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:40, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Family : Grapsidae (Marsh Crabs)

File:Duomo, Firenze.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2022 at 07:43:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Italy
Info created & uploaded by Clément Bardot - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IMO it's just a view of Florence with its beautiful cathedral. The picture isn't very sharp. No WOW effect for me. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 08:08, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Sebring. We need a really special picture of this view for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sadly per Ikan, it's a good photo but I'd want more outstanding light or else higher resolution and quality for a common if beautiful motif. Cmao20 (talk) 11:12, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Sebring and Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:31, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 13:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eglwys Santes Dwynwen at Llanddwyn island 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2022 at 13:28:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United Kingdom
Info all by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light and featureless sky, in my view. And these ruins are not so spectacular. This is a decent photograph but not one of the best of the site in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Satdeep Gill (talk) 03:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative[edit]

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United Kingdom
Info all by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:30, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:30, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per the guidelines: "Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process". Alternatives are "suggested by voters". Also for the reasons given above -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Basile Morin Thank you for pointing this out.

I withdraw my nomination Satdeep Gill (talk) 03:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hübnerite - Pasto Bueno, Ancash, Peru.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2022 at 15:28:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals
Info all by Ivar (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:28, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 16:05, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Granada (talk) 16:08, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment ~~Please, hold back this nom, you already have 2 running~~, Ivar, those are the rules Poco a poco (talk) 17:23, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Poco a poco: please check one more time, slowly. -- Ivar (talk) 17:37, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ehem, ok, sorry, take it back, Poco a poco (talk) 18:28, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:04, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:17, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:27, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 11:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:52, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 20:45, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:07, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:59, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 13:53, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:41, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the way the blue background suggests a skyline ... Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:40, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:51, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:St Procopius church in Strzelno (3).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2022 at 15:58:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Poland
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 15:58, 5 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. The salience should be on the church, not on the leaves. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:49, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I have no problem with the composition or quality, but the light seems too dull for FP Cmao20 (talk) 00:08, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I kind of like this. This is autumn. It is sometimes gloomy. While it would undoubtedly look smarter with a blue sky and sunlight, that's the hand the photographer was dealt and I think he played it quite well. Daniel Case (talk) 18:13, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:29, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel. And it’s a really unusual church building. --Aristeas (talk) 05:52, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Aristeas; indeed, it's one of the odlest churches in Poland. Tournasol7 (talk) 06:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:36, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per SHB2000. -- Karelj (talk) 11:59, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful leaves on the grass, but I really dislike the right part of the picture, constituted of this building which seems voluntarily integrated into the composition, and also per Cmao20: dull light. Cloudy sky. Incidentally the DoF could have been more generous to highlight the foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:12, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose While it's a cute picture, it's not FA material. Light is too dull, composition is districting. The leaves are also not interesting enough to merit the foreground. --Fernando (talk) 17:56, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steinernes Meer vom Seehorn.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2022 at 12:12:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Salzburg
Info Looking eastward from the Seehorn in the Berchtesgaden Alps to the Steinernes Meer. All by me. --Milseburg (talk) 12:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 12:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice!--Famberhorst (talk) 15:05, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:36, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:24, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Super! -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:41, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 20:46, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support For sure one of your best Alpine shots to date. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:15, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:25, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:08, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support In focus ! --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:23, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:22, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 10:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very good full view of the Alps where can see mountainous here. Maanshen (talk) 12:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:51, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Majestic. --Aristeas (talk) 13:54, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:19, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:47, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:07, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow --PierreSelim (talk) 06:25, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:56, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 16:26, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high resolution, and per Sebring12Hrs. But I think {{Panorama}} should be added -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:24, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Done - Thanks. --Milseburg (talk) 13:33, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:59, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:48, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 31 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /—‍Mdaniels5757 (talk • contribs) 13:16, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Chipping sparrow (05555).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2022 at 18:35:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passerellidae_(New_world_sparrows)
Info Chipping sparrow (Spizella passerina). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:35, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 18:35, 6 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cute. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:32, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:36, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geez, I really can't stop obsessively staring at the sparrow. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:53, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the head position. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support For me the background offsets the head position (not uncommon in finches). Daniel Case (talk) 17:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the head position - it is a common position as mentioned above and gives the picture feeling of life and typical sparrow energy --Kritzolina (talk) 08:32, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:36, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Memorial Presbyterian Church, St. Augustine FL, South view 20160707 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2022 at 00:01:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United_States
Info Very sharp and detailed photo of the facade of an architecturally interesting church, this kind of lighting doesn't normally work but in this instance I think it is perfect to illustrate the subject. created by DXR - uploaded by DXR - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 00:01, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:31, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 06:36, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The palm tree is slightly obstructing the left-hand side of the church and I find that distracting. --SHB2000 (talk) 06:51, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:39, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:33, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:07, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:30, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:38, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:30, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, the lighting just doesn't work for me even with the explanation. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:29, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:13, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:38, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fantastic! --Fernando (talk) 17:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:44, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:36, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Cape May warbler (47145).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2022 at 12:49:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Parulidae_(New_World_Warblers)
Info Cape May warbler. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:49, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I also like the natural environment. --Cayambe (talk) 14:39, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Chirp chirp ;-) --SHB2000 (talk) 08:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Background is almost too distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 18:33, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:21, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:31, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:07, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A beautiful one. --Aristeas (talk) 07:55, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:14, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, ehem. Sondermunitionslager Visbeck, Unterstand -- 2022 -- 4465 (bw).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2022 at 12:05:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created and uploaded and by XRay -- XRay 💬 12:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info The ammunition depot is a monument and a reminder of the Cold War. The black and white image emphasizes the past, the elements such as lantern and fence show the context of the depot. --XRay 💬 12:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 12:05, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Although the fence is not contemporary is it? ~~Perhaps the image is tilted?~~ Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, the image isn't tilted. The roof is tilted. It's for the rain water, see the pipe on the left. The fence is not parallel to the roof. --XRay 💬 10:34, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If you like, here is another view: File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, ehem. Sondermunitionslager Visbeck -- 2022 -- 4477.jpg --XRay 💬 10:37, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A bit too busy. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:45, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The image looks a bit too crowded and busy. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:45, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support When I browsed the WLM 2022/DE photos, this one catched my attention. It’s very difficult to create an appealing photograph of an unobtrusive monument like this Cold War reminder, and IMHO here this black-and-white photograph with its subtle elegance succeeds. --Aristeas (talk) 14:45, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Christian. Definitely a QI, though. Daniel Case (talk) 22:02, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas --Kritzolina (talk) 08:25, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:00, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good documentation and a QI/VI, and maybe I'm missing something, but I'm not perceiving a great composition. This motif may not allow one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:01, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wasn't sure at first but it grows on me, it could work as an artistic wall print Cmao20 (talk) 20:06, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Considering that almost anything can be considered "art" as long as it is mixed with similar productions, in this particular case I don't find the photograph very convincing. The color version does not galvanize me either. Like Christian and Daniel I find the picture busy, and like Ikan the composition appears average to my eyes. Not one of the best images of Wikimedia Commons in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Christian. -- Karelj (talk) 10:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. —kallerna (talk) 11:45, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:15, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Subject is very confusing, and surroundings doesn't help. I understand the intention behind using B&W, but it doesn't help to the unknowing viewer. --Fernando (talk) 17:49, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:15, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:San Francisco (CA, USA), Golden Gate Bridge -- 2022 -- 3023 (bw).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2022 at 10:33:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Golden_Gate_Bridge,_San_Francisco
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 10:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info I know, there are several featured pictures of the Golden Gate Bridge. Since there are also cropped photographs, I would like to present another view. It is also a cropped photo. The image is in black and white, as this emphasizes the foggy mood. --XRay 💬 10:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 10:33, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very atmospheric capture of the queen of bridges. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:52, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:46, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:19, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:39, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:12, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:40, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Composition is a little bit different, in a good way Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:29, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality is not that good considering the size, and the image would be better with colours. Quite a few good FPs already. —kallerna (talk) 11:47, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:15, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges#Golden_Gate_Bridge,_San_Francisco

File:Raufüßige Hosenbiene.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 04:46:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family : Melittidae (Melittid Bees)
Info created and uploaded by Sven Damerow - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 04:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:46, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:20, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 08:29, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This one is overexposed and with stacking errors around the blurred parts of the flower in front of the insect. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:36, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, there are some flaws, but hell of detail here, that overcompensates those issues IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 19:03, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Poco.--Ermell (talk) 19:28, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:47, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:04, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Poco. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:55, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:31, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Poco – and it’s so beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 14:47, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:56, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:37, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:28, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:55, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family : Melittidae (Melittid Bees)

File:Eugène Grasset - A La Place Clichy.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2022 at 17:20:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Printed#Posters_and_advertisements
Info created by Eugène Grasset - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:20, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:32, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Brilliant Cmao20 (talk) 11:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:23, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:02, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:21, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:11, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:39, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:38, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File: Црквата „Св. Недела“ - Габреш.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2022 at 23:21:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings
Info Churches usually don’t have a basement and a staircase leading to the entrance. This one was a surprising exception. All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:21, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:21, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was going to say where's the wow until you gave that description. While there are some Antarctic churches that have a staircase leading to the entrance, this one was suprisingly on concrete and I just like how everything is laid out perfectly. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:24, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The staircase at the left feels too boxed in; a longer aspect ratio would help. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:26, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That would insert a distracting background on the left side. Also, moving a few steps to the left would reduce the angle on the southern side, which is more interesting than the western side of the church.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:10, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think overall the composition just feels vertically unbalanced, with too much weight in the upper half of the image. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:14, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Simple and striking, also per SHB2000 Cmao20 (talk) 20:09, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I like the idea of this but a) it feels just a touch overexposed; the highlights on the sand or whatever could stand to be dimmed a bit and b) it just feels like the photograph is trying to do too much here. A simpler framing from a different angle, perhaps to the left of this one, might work better. Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:39, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red-headed weaver (Anaplectes rubriceps leuconotus) male.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2022 at 10:38:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)
Info I know the tail is a bit out of focus but I still think this is a strong candidate because of the excellent, satisfying composition and the fact that it's really nice to have a 'behaviour' shot where we see the bird building a nest. created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 10:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 10:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination. This is the only true weaver that builds his nest with intertwined twigs rather than grass. He builds the structure and waits for a female to be impressed before finishing it. She then completes the soft furnishings. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:02, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:45, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:34, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:23, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely setting and pose. --Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:56, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Satdeep Gill. --Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:44, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:11, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:16, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:47, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:40, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:23, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)

File:Huntington Gardens 12 - Mammillaria humboldtii.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2022 at 07:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants#Family : Cactaceae
Info created & uploaded by Mike Peel - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:38, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great to look at the details on the plant at full size, but the shadows are a bit annoying. Will live with this one for a while before voting Cmao20 (talk) 11:10, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The label is misplaced. Ordinary top down view. Distracting shadows. The picture is too average for FP in my opinion, but is worth its QI badge -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 02:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:40, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Caroline Hill as Mirza in W. S. Gilbert's The Palace of Truth.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2022 at 23:44:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by London Stereoscopic and Photographic Company - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support not very sharp, but from 1870 must be the best as possbile --Ezarateesteban 17:08, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've fed this photo into my new magic toolbox and after a few minutes of work this came out: File:Caroline_Hill_as_Mirza_in_W._S._Gilbert's_The_Palace_of_Truth_enhanced.jpg I'm a bit scared now. --Granada (talk) 14:41, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting exercise, but not relevant to the restored image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:21, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly makes the mouth look odd if you zoom in. Good thumbnail, though. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:54, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Would it be too much of a sin to crop some of that empty upper space out? Daniel Case (talk) 20:02, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not good to crop archive photos. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:46, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I prefer CSS image crop for that. Would also screw with one of the en-wiki usages (Part of a set of two images displayed next to each other) Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:31, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support From 1870 and looks good at larger than original size. It strikes me as odd that she wasn't smiling, but how long did exposures have to be in 1870? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:10, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Do remember this is a photo of her in character, which might be as much of the issue. Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:43, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Point taken. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:04, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I like how she looks somewhat unusual because she personifies that character … Ironically, this way she appears much more “real” and natural to me than many ”correct” portraits of that time ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 17:14, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:37, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sevilla 2022 - chapter house.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2022 at 17:19:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Spain
Info created by User:Fernando - uploaded by User:Fernando - nominated by Fernando -- Fernando (talk) 17:19, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Chapter house panorama of the Seville Cathedral. A jewel of Spanish renaissance architecture.
Neutral Definitely a jewel of Renaissance architecture, but I am unsure about the photo of it. I appreciate that you wanted to get the verticals vertical and to show also the wonderful floor. However the resulting top crop seems a bit arbitrary – who would not want to see a bit more of these wonderful sculptures? In addition the top part is slightly overexposed and the barrier does not help the photo, sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 15:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Bases of the side stanchions seem slightly distorted and the stanchions themselves seem to have a little magenta CA. Daniel Case (talk) 20:21, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The salience is on the unremarkable tiles. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:22, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I like it but I think there is too much floor and too little sculptures at the top Cmao20 (talk) 20:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:36, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Khairdeen, alias Pritam, relishing a mango at the dusk of his life 05.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2022 at 05:50:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info all by Satdeep Gill. Khairdeen has an existing Black and White portrait on Commons that was selected as a Featured picture earlier this year. This portrait shows him relishing a mango, sitting outside his house. Black and white version of this file exists but the mango becomes less apparent in that. Hence, I chose to nominate this version for a featured picture. Looking forward to all the comments and feedback. -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 05:50, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another photo which would fit nicely into National Geographic and similar magazines. A moving portrait – I like Khairdeen’s closed eyes and how carefully his hands hold the fruit, both show his concentration on the taste of the mango. Good technical quality (especially when we consider that this is ISO 2,000!) – nice colours and perfect focus on the main point of interest, the mango. Khairdeen stands out nicely against the background which is is at the same time unobtrusive and informative (the peeling paint hints at the impoverished circumstances of his live). --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:19, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:28, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support flawless! --Fernando (talk) 13:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support if it was not planned, another level here. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:10, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good focus. {{PR}} added -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. Daniel Case (talk) 04:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:07, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:44, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:34, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:12, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Eurasian brown bear (Ursus arctos arctos) cub 14 months.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2022 at 08:30:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Ursidae_(Bears)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:30, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:43, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:44, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 11:37, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice photo and cute cub. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the best light but compelling angle. Gallery link updated -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 06:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Satdeep Gill (talk) 06:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cute! --SHB2000 (talk) 09:21, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 18:34, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:07, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:46, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:29, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 07:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:37, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 18:45, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:31, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:34, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:11, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Geopende zaaddoos van een wilde hyacint 24-07-2022. (d.j.b).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2022 at 15:02:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Asparagaceae
Info Opened seed pod of a Hyacinthoides non-scripta. Focus stack of 30 photos. --Famberhorst (talk)All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:02, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Granada (talk) 15:43, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:13, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:08, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:22, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. Gallery link fixed ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 13:56, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A number of blurred areas where the stacking has not been post-processed. See note. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:18, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. correction Thank you for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:42, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Still work to do. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:59, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question: In the same place?--Famberhorst (talk) 04:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Only temporary oppose (5 days almost up) till minor focus-stacking errors corrected. New notes added. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:01, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral The reflections on the lower seeds look weird. Daniel Case (talk) 02:27, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done.Reflection adjusted. Thank you for your reviews --Famberhorst (talk) 04:43, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:00, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 08:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive, particularly considering the size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:07, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:58, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:47, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:26, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 04:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Thakur Devi Singh Bridge East Chandra Tandi Lahaul Oct22 A7C 03356.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2022 at 23:33:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#India
Info created & uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:33, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the composition and the feeling of a bridge to nowhere, or rather, to a seemingly uninhabited mountain. This is not likely to be the kind of place most non-Indians think of first when they think of India. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:33, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Ikan Kekek --Tagooty (talk) 02:25, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 18:33, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 20:43, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've been doing a lot of work lately on the "Mountains with snow" categories, in which there are a lot of pictures from India, so I'm not surprised by this. But it's still good. Daniel Case (talk) 01:04, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I know. I've been to Kashmir. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:12, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:49, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:30, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:39, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 19:57, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:45, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:56, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:31, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Gumbaz - Srirangapatna.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2022 at 08:01:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India
Info created by Sumit Surai - uploaded by Sumit Surai - nominated by Sumitsurai -- Sumit Surai (talk) 08:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sumit Surai (talk) 08:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The dust spots should be removed.--Ermell (talk) 08:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 17:05, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:57, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I can't support this when the slight tilt is obvious. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:39, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh light. —kallerna (talk) 11:41, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. Where is the wow ? It's leaning on a bit, the building is slightly over-exposed, and it is not very sharp for an FP. Even for QI the picture is at the limit IMO. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 14:49, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'm not saying you should support, but the building would be the wow if a viewer were feeling wowed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Of course ! This is just my opinion. I downgrad my strong oppose to oppose. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 08:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose Beautiful architecture but the light is a bit too harsh and shadowy for FP and the image quality is not quite sharp enough to make up for it. The kind of picture I wouldn't vote to delist if it were already featured, but not going to support Cmao20 (talk) 11:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral To give this photo a little love: I can’t find any substantial tilt; the photo seems correctly aligned, I would guess that just the building itself is not perfectly rectangular (quite common with old buildings ;–). The composition is simple but effective. It’s just that the light is somewhat harsh and the colours are a little bit dull. We have no EXIF data, but I assume this file is based on a straight out-of-camera JPEG file – the slightly overexposed bright areas, the dark shadows and the bland colours are typical for the JPEG engine of many digital cameras. I guess that if we had a raw image file of the same shot and could process it correctly, the photo would look better and gain the certain something which is missing right now. (I am saying this mostly as a hint for all who are still unsure whether to switch to the raw image file format of their camera. Yes, shooting in raw means more post-processing, but it can really make the difference.) --Aristeas (talk) 07:51, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Kallerna and Cmao20 -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:50, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice composition, but I'm not sure it's FP-level. But either way, I'd suggest for you to eliminate the dust spots on the left in the sky. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:38, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Loup gris (Canis lupus ).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2022 at 08:04:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Carnivora
Info Portrait of Eurasian wolf (Canis lupus lupus). Domaine of Pescheray, France. All by me --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:04, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Clément Bardot (talk) 08:04, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:27, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I really like this photo, but it is not huge for an animal pic on Commons, nowadays, and it is a zoo pic. But I do think it deserves a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per IK. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:32, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Facial expression of dispirited zoo animal. —kallerna (talk) 11:40, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:31, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:33, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 07:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:59, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:35, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:25, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A zoo is an unnatural environment where animals are kept for the pleasure of humans. The effort required to get a good image of a zoo animal is far less than for an animal in nature. Unless it is a species that is rare in nature, I would not support zoo images to be featured on Commons. The Eurasian wolf is not rare, it is listed as being of "least concern". --Tagooty (talk) 07:30, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am not saying you should support and you are right to think that nothing replaces wildlife. However, the domain of Pescheray, like some other parks, works for the conservation and the reintroduction of many species (which sometimes come from individuals or circuses). The domain participates financially in the reintroduction program, with the money obtained thanks to the entrances of the visitors. For example, two bisons were recently reintroduced to Azerbaijan like many others. --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info about Pescheray, am glad to hear of the humane activities. --Tagooty (talk) 12:59, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:27, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Steinbrech Focus stack-20200409-RM-172359.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2022 at 21:00:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Crassulaceae
Info All by me -- Ermell (talk) 21:00, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:00, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:11, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:03, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support How big is this flower, and how might it be identified? User:Archaeodontosaurus, do you know what the species of this plant is? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

InfoI think it is Saxifraga apiculata but I am not sure. The plant is about 5 cm high.--Ermell (talk) 08:50, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We really do need it to be identified for it to be FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Charles is right there is no need to know the name for FP. If the competitor wants to come in VI he must add: Saxifraga hirculus --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 12:30, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:56, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good now. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:16, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 16:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:55, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:54, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:41, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 07:07, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 15:13, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:50, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:40, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 02:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:21, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:29, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light, good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dinkum (talk) 18:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Renfe 334 028 Aldea del Cano.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2022 at 14:50:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info reated & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 14:50, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 14:50, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The environment around the train is a bit cluttered, but I like the overall mood of an otherwise sleepy afternoon in this part of Spain briefly interrupted by this passing train. Daniel Case (talk) 02:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 07:55, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:07, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:50, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel. --Aristeas (talk) 07:56, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No any reason for FP nominatin, IHMO. Just a train in agriculturale landscape. -- Karelj (talk) 11:47, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow for me. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not outstanding enough for FP. --Milseburg (talk) 09:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, and the red toilet doesn't help either. --A.Savin 19:59, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Fig (Ficus carica) fruit halved.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2022 at 09:51:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits (raw)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 09:51, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:51, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 14:03, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful and appetizing. --Aristeas (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:24, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:10, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--PierreSelim (talk) 20:32, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support So impressive and educational! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:09, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:53, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:40, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:11, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:02, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:43, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 15:13, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:56, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:32, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:07, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Appetizing :-) Basile Morin (talk) 04:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Fruits (raw)

File:Xenophora cerea 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2022 at 06:16:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Xenophoridae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:16, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 06:16, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question This is not a fossil? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Info No, it is extant, a member of the so called carrier shells. They collect different things and attach them to their shell at regular intervals. Some species prefer to collect shells, others corals, others stones. This species collects mainly stones, while e.g. Xenophora pallidula collects mainly shells. --Llez (talk) 08:38, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Interesting, thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:19, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Indeed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:50, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:53, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive shapes and structures. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:59, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 14:55, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 18:36, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:25, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:09, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:51, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:40, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:56, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:44, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:32, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:07, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:14, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:41, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Khairdeen, alias Pritam, sitting on a cot outside his house in Jandali, district Ludhiana, Punjab, India 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2022 at 17:44:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info In this photograph, Khairdeen is seen sitting on the cot outside his house. The existing Featured Picture of him is a close-up and the other current nomination is also a close-up but with closed eyes. This photograph shows more of his surroundings. His walking stick is in the foreground and there are dungcakes under his cot. We see his bare feet but a pair of shoes nearby. He seems to be contemplating about something. All by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 17:44, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not only very good quality, but also an exemplary environmental portrait, impressive and moving: through the depiction of the simple everyday objects around him, this photograph seems to sum up Khairdeen’s long, arduous and impoverished life in a single image. But at the same time – and this is very important – Khairdeen appears very dignified. That is really a feat. --Aristeas (talk) 18:13, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 21:05, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:10, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:57, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:03, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:05, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:42, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 15:13, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 14:00, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:35, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:30, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Sitting people

File:Batería de Castillitos, Cartagena, España, 2022-07-16, DD 67-69 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2022 at 17:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Spain
Info View of the coastal artillery site Castillitos, Cartagena, Spain. It was built together with the coastal artillery Cenizas in order to protect the entrance to the Bay of Cartagena in the Mediterranean Sea. The construction took place between 1933 and 1936 following a project from 1926 during the dictatorship of Primo de Rivera. It's a Spanish National Heritage Monument since 1985. Note: there is already one FP of this site. Poco a poco (talk) 17:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:01, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Great mood and composition but the two lower bollards are visibly distorted. Daniel Case (talk) 02:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Daniel, sorry, it's clearly a strong QI but for me the large and obvious distortions make the composition unsatisfying. Cmao20 (talk) 11:07, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but the framing isn't quite there. it's confusing and "twisted". Distortion at the bottom is too visible. --Fernando (talk) 17:40, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would support a crop suggestion like the one I've added. It still has distortions but they wouldn't bother me so much if there were a more focussed crop that eliminated the worst of it. Cmao20 (talk) 18:54, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Cmao20, Fernando, Daniel Case: I've substantially reduced the distortion and cropped the bottom in the original file and, following Camo20's advice, I'm offering an alt version below with a different crop, thank you for your comments! Poco a poco (talk) 19:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alt[edit]

Support Alternative version with a tigther crop on right Poco a poco (talk) 19:26, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, this is a lot better to me. It’s still distorted but not so much that it throws you out of the picture and makes you start having to make sense of how it must have really looked. I can accept this distortion as part of the compromises needed to get the photo, and I also think the composition is improved this way. You have sufficient resolution that a radical crop like this is possible. Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 07:26, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 – thank you for the very interesting crop suggestion, IMHO it also makes the photo more “concentrated”. This is also a very atmospheric photo, the two people on the bench are a perfect rounding off. --Aristeas (talk) 08:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the image is tilted to the right, well visible on the pylon of the power line and on the horizon in the hollow between the mountains in the background (I made annotations on the description page). All correctable. --Llez (talk) 10:10, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Llez: Done, thanks Poco a poco (talk) 11:57, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

- Support now --Llez (talk) 12:13, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much better with the new crop! --Fernando (talk) 13:16, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao -- IamMM (talk) 06:04, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:36, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:42, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

The chosen alternative is: File:Batería de Castillitos, Cartagena, España, 2022-07-16, DD 67-69 HDR-Edit.jpg

File:InsidecatedralAngels.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2022 at 16:37:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Brazil
Info created and uploaded by Dasfour2022 - nominated by ArionEstar -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 16:37, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 16:37, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Optical quality could be better but I really like the composition and the colors. -- Wolf im Wald 19:38, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Guess I should have tried using my cell phone. Might have been better. These days cells phones are awesome but at that time, I only had a poor quality cell phone. But thanks for noticing my photo. At least it was judged. Though the cross and podium are straight according to the horizon. Not sure what caused the curved wall in the background to photograph like that. I will return to reshoot the photo one day to see how I can improve on it. Maybe next year I will submit a better photo. Dasfour2022 (talk) 13:01, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:03, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The image quality is borderline but the motif is great, however it is clearly tilted and the crop is off-centre. Will support if someone improves that Cmao20 (talk) 11:09, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I used the cross to set the horizon. The circular wall can be a bit deceiving. The podium too is horizontally correct. Dasfour2022 (talk) 12:40, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose At a first glance, I could easily tell that this is off-centre. Not FP nor QI to me, sorry. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:32, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I used the cross to set the horizon. The circular wall can be a bit deceiving. The podium too is horizontally correct. Dasfour2022 (talk) 12:41, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. In addition, it's blurred a lot at the top. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:51, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I couldnt afford a really expensive wide angle lens that would all the edges of a photo to be sharp. They cost thousands of dollars. Dasfour2022 (talk) 12:58, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Needs work. Subject has the wow factor, but it's tilted and off centred. I'd encourage the artist to fix it and try again. --Fernando (talk) 17:37, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I used the cross to set the horizon. The circular wall can be a bit deceiving. The podium too is horizontally correct. If I reset the horizon then the cross is off kilter as well as the podium. What am I to do? Dasfour2022 (talk) 12:41, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I kind of feel the composition makes it look dynamic. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:05, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp at top, and distorted on sides. Daniel Case (talk) 18:30, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Shot with a 17mm lens. Imposible to have focus in all edges of the photo. A cell phone might give you that but the wide angle lens I used obviously did not give focus on the edges. Had i used a very expesive lens it might have been in focus but I can't afford thousnds of dollars for one. Dasfour2022 (talk) 12:44, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, ehem. Sondermunitionslager Visbeck, Beobachtungsturm der US Army -- 2022 -- 4452 (bw).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2022 at 16:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 16:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Perhaps one more remark: It is safety glass (or bulletproof glass). Accordingly, the traces in the glass are somewhat different than in normal glass. For example, you can see the effect on the individual layers of the glass. --XRay 💬 10:13, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 16:33, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special! --Famberhorst (talk) 05:35, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's really interesting. Thanks for noticing it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:53, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:49, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Famberhorst and Ikan Kekek. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:18, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:30, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:44, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Makes you want to find out what it is ... I thought it was some micro-organism. Daniel Case (talk) 18:23, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Makes one pause and think. --Tagooty (talk) 02:20, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:21, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:33, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:29, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Abstract. Striking :-) Basile Morin (talk) 05:02, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking! --SHB2000 (talk) 10:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Grade F 2 Rennwagen (1921) Classic-Gala 2022 1X7A0142.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2022 at 14:06:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
Info One of about twelve produced racing-cars from Grade Automobilwerke at Classic-Gala Schwetzingen 2022. All by Alexander-93 - -- Alexander-93 (talk) 14:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexander-93 (talk) 14:06, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The people aren't right, nor are the two posts. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:34, 12 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Probably a great candidate for COM:VI, but whatever the driver and companion are doing down there, it's is not helping the image. --El Grafo (

talk) 08:58, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per El Grafo. "but whatever the driver and companion are doing down there" : And we don't want to know lol. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 10:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per El Grafo. Strong VI candidate. --Fernando (talk) 18:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles and El Grafo. The WB is also a little on the warm side. Daniel Case (talk) 18:28, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice moment... -- Karelj (talk) 11:34, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The problem to me is the steering wheel in front of the face of the person on our right. Great car, though! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:26, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hallo Alexander, hast Du vielleicht eine Serie von Bildern aufgenommen? – Das Motiv ist spannend, nur der in der jetzigen Aufnahme gezeigte Augenblick ist etwas ungünstig. Falls Du noch ein anderes Bild hast, wäre es vielleicht wert, es damit zu versuchen. Grüße, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:35, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hey @Frank Schulenburg: In total I took four pictures during this situation. The two guys tried starting the vehicle and and finally made it. Maybe the picture on the right is better?--Alexander-93 (talk) 13:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nieuw blad van Cyclamen coum. 09-10-2022. (d.j.b) 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2022 at 14:48:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Primulaceae
Info New leaf of winter bloomer Cyclamen coum between fallen leaves and acorns in autumn. Focus stack of 15 photos.}}
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 14:48, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 14:48, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment something went wrong with postprocessing, the image has very odd posterization and blurred parts. -- Ivar (talk) 17:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, needs a complete rework assuming the underlying images of the leaves are sharp. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:48, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. Want to highlight a stain? I don't quite see what you mean.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've made a few notes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:25, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the comment.--Famberhorst (talk) 04:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Passo Pordoi-bops 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2022 at 16:09:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy
Info created and uploaded by Bops92 - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 16:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:09, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive, beautiful and well done. --Aristeas (talk) 16:48, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support That is good composition and timing - Benh (talk) 17:18, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice composition, but a little bit noisy and a little bit more space at the top would be better.--Alexander-93 (talk) 18:44, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:10, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Benh. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:48, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PierreSelim (talk) 21:08, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Alexander-93. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:10, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:13, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:05, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:01, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 07:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment More sky for me too. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:42, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:19, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Could be a little bit sharper. --XRay 💬 13:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:41, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:50, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Alexander-93 -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:03, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:44, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Percy Anderson - Poster for The Duchess of Dantzic.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2022 at 20:24:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Percy Anderson - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Another in my line of "If we're going to cover the development of early musicals, let's illustrate it well." Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:27, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:35, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:51, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:06, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 18:13, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 19:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:45, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:01, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Catedral de San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, España, 2022-01-07, DD, DD 73-75 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2022 at 21:15:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Spain
Info High Altar of the Cathedral of San Cristóbal de La Laguna, Tenerife, Spain. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:15, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:15, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent photo of a very impressive church interior. I especially like how the sunlight shining through the windows and the candles on the altar work together to create a harmonic, atmospheric lighting. (Of course it should be forbidden to install microphones and other ugly stuff with cables in such a beautiful building. ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 08:25, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:24, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Picture is a bit off-centred and it's tilted to the right, I'd check the columns on the left especially. --Fernando (talk) 13:14, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fernando: I've fixed the tilt and the overexposed areas in the stained-glasses and also tried my best regarding symmetry, although you're right, the camera was a little bit off-centered. Poco a poco (talk) 15:53, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:23, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The interior lines are striking enough to offset the potentially distracting elements at the bottom corners. But please do something about the distortion evident at the sides. Daniel Case (talk) 04:06, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Request fulfilled, Daniel Case Poco a poco (talk) 09:40, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
OK. Not completely fixed (maybe not completely fixable anyway) but better. Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:18, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is a shame about the big blown light, but view the altar at full size and you are in no doubt that this an FP level photo Cmao20 (talk) 20:08, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:06, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:41, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:37, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:22, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:29, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Poster by Anna Soós Korànyi for the Seventh Conference of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2022 at 17:20:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Printed#Posters_and_advertisements
Info created by Anna Soós Korànyi - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:20, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I love the poster! Nice restoration, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:03, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Significant contemporary document of perhaps the most important congress of this alliance. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:09, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 19:21, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 07:13, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:48, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:43, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:00, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:46, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Ethiopian wolf (Canis simensis citernii) 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2022 at 10:13:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora
Info Christmas Day 2017. There are fewer than 400 of these Endangered wolves remaining in the wild. The wolf and the shrub are both Ethiopian endemics, living at 4000m above sea level. No current FPs. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:13, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:13, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 12:11, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Sharpness is lacking and lighting is dull, the bright areas aren't on the visible part of the face. Foreground is too distracting. Quality, but not FA IMO --Fernando (talk) 13:25, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose along similar lines to Fernando. I don't mind the degree of lighting on the wolf, but the very bright, out of focus flowers in the foreground are distracting and the sharpness on the wolf could be better. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:54, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I should have read the description more carefully first. Vote crossed out, given the scarcity of this species of wolf. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:00, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support I realise that the lighting is somewhat dull, but if there are fewer than 400 in total, then the wow factor clearly surpasses the minor lighting issue, IMO. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:21, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. These guys live on a treeless plateau so it is tricky to get close. Vehicles have to stay on the road and walking is, let me suggest, unwise. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:48, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support per SHB. If you had to give up Christmas to get it ... Daniel Case (talk) 18:21, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per SHB2000. --Aristeas (talk) 18:36, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sharp enough for me Cmao20 (talk) 20:09, 15 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:08, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:39, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:55, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 11:31, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora

File:Egyptian grasshopper (Anacridium aegyptium) on crab apple (Malus sylvestris) Corfu.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2022 at 21:47:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Acrididae (locusts)
Info One head-on FP (2013) and one side view FP (from 2007) of this species.All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:47, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:06, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:06, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dinkum (talk) 17:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:23, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:44, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 15:19, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:27, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Family : Acrididae (locusts)

File:Plan of the Odra border river near Bohumín.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2022 at 12:14:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical#1700-1800
Info created by Arnold Neüwertz & Tolentin Schonat - uploaded by Plánovací kalendář - nominated by Plánovací kalendář -- Plánovací kalendář (talk) 12:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Plánovací kalendář (talk) 12:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Nice map. Why is the border slanted on both sides? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:07, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The folds are stronger at the top. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Ikan. It could stand to be perspective corrected if the camera took the image at an angle. And Adam's criticism should be taken into account as well. Daniel Case (talk) 00:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Slanted border, don't see how this map is so extraordinarily remarkable. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is the text contemporaneous? The writing overlaps features on the map (e.g. islands in the river) which is unusual. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't seem that odd for the period. I'd say the folds at the top and the distortion they cause is a bigger problem. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Namibia Cheetah Feeding5.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2022 at 07:38:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Felidae (Felids)
Info created & uploaded by AlexanderKlink - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:38, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:38, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A long way from FP technical quality. Can we assume this is a captive animal being fed? Charlesjsharp (talk)
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 00:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp. And crop too tight at the bottom -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:05, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles in addition to the poor crop. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:10, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, useful and interesting image but not FP quality Cmao20 (talk) 11:26, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 21:59, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Estátua de Elis Regina na Orla do Guaíba.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2022 at 21:48:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Monuments_and_memorials
Info created by Otávio Astor Vaz Costa - uploaded by Otávio Astor Vaz Costa - nominated by Otávio Astor Vaz Costa -- Otávio Astor Vaz Costa (talk) 21:48, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, now with favorable resolution -- Otávio Astor Vaz Costa (talk) 21:48, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Otávio Astor Vaz Costa, you need to add the number 2 to your filename, save it and then copy it here in order to do a renomination. But I should tell you, the image quality and light are nowhere close to making this photo one of the best on the site, so your nomination would again have no chance of success. Part of that may be down to the equipment you used to take the photo. (A cellphone, perhaps? There's no way for me to tell from the metadata.) But either way, I'd recommend for you to seek feedback for your photos at COM:Photography critiques and COM:QIC for now, and look through existing featured pictures at COM:FP to see what we've already featured. Of course, you are always welcome here, too, but as the photos we feature are intended to be really outstanding, expect very demanding critiques. All my best to you, Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:11, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 08:53, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2021-02-05 IBSF World Championships Bobsleigh and Skeleton Altenberg 1DX 0111 by Stepro.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2022 at 22:35:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Other team sports
Info IBSF World Championships Bobsleigh and Skeleton Altenberg: Margot Boch / Carla Senechal (FRA, France); created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support -- Stepro (talk) 22:35, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Klasse! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:26, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent capture! -- Radomianin (talk) 05:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality, compelling compo. But I think you can remove the {{PR}} template, because behind this helmet nobody's going to recognize her, for sure! -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 05:24, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:19, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:52, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 17:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Granada (talk) 05:55, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:51, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:12, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:56, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:21, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Other team sports

File:Pillars of Creation (NIRCam Image).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2022 at 21:59:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy
Info created by NASA, ESA, CSA, STScI (SCIENCE) and Joseph DePasquale (STScI), Anton M. Koekemoer (STScI), Alyssa Pagan (STScI) (IMAGE PROCESSING) - uploaded and nominated by Habitator terrae -- Habitator terrae 🌍 21:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Habitator terrae 🌍 21:59, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I find there are several duplicates of this image on Commons, might needs integration. --Tiouraren (talk) 03:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Two .png and one .tif. The proposed image seems to me the only exiting .jpg version, which is needed because of the better rendering of .jpg by Wikimedia. Habitator terrae 🌍 09:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
A praying mantis in space? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 09:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support another one of my favourite pics as an astronomy buff. Everything is just perfect. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:09, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although I wouldn't be against a set with the tiff (so that browsing to its page shows the FP label too). The tiff could probably be seen as more accurate data (which I guess is ultimately what astronomer use it for) while JPEG is easier to display while browsing. What an incredible shot! - Benh (talk) 11:13, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Actually (as far as out of interest I have taken a look at the raw data) the merged tiff-image isn't the data used by astronomers. They use different layers in different files of the intensity of the different "invisible" infared red colors, here shown with different visible colors. Habitator terrae 🌍 19:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:07, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:48, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Dinkum (talk) 17:54, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:53, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:37, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 17:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Simply great! I was stunned when the 1995 photo of this nebula came to my vision, this is even more stunning and JWST has a bright future ahead! --Granada (talk) 19:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Nythar^T^.^C 05:33, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 10:38, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:11, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:56, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:20, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy

File:Impala Marawa Quad Skates Comparison.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2022 at 17:13:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing_and_textiles
Info created and uploaded by MossAlbatross - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 17:13, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 17:13, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Such things are certainly not my cup of tea, but I really like this photo because its clean, simple and inventive at the same time. The confrontation of the two different quad skates makes them much more interesting for a photo than each of them would be at its own – it adds some tension and fun to the photo. --Aristeas (talk) 16:47, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. Not the sort of thing we've seen much of here. Daniel Case (talk) 18:29, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Refreshing originality - made me want to watch the musical Starlight Express :) -- Radomianin (talk) 19:52, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:59, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak oppose~~ Interesting accessories, but like this nomination, the crop is too tight, left and right, in my view. Lead room is missing for these shoes on wheels evoking mobility. @MossAlbatross: can you offer more space around? The current composition is very compact -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:28, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Info Composition is in part dictated by some external constraints; in a time pinch to catch some nice light, I had to repurpose a desk mat into the backdrop, which meant the sizing is perhaps not the most ideal (nor are the wrinkles as Charlesjsharp pointed out). I can offer a tiny bit more space around, but it is weighted more on the left than the right and I preferred a more squared off composition to keep the focus centered. Happy to post an updated file with that spacing though, or post a separate retouched file with that spacing and some light editing on the wrinkles. Appreciate the time and attention to my photo regardless! MossAlbatross (talk) 23:26, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Worth a try in my opinion. You could upload a version with maximum space on both sides, then revert, to offer a comparison from the history. Or create a new file for an alternative. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:43, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the file with a bit more spacing! I'll revert once you've seen it (not sure how new files impact previous votes, but I assume I should keep it to the previous version for this?) MossAlbatross (talk) 16:08, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, MossAlbatross. Slightly better in my view. I would support this version if you like it, just take it from the history -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As the original proposer I am a bit confused now - should this be presented as an alternative version? I have never done this so far, could someone please help? --Kritzolina (talk) 05:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's possible to propose an alternative, like here, or to ping everyone -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for the help, Basile Morin! Your photo editing is much appreciated; the background folds were truly a nuisance. I used your updated version but corrected the color which seemed to have been desaturated a bit (the skates are very vibrant in person). MossAlbatross (talk) 03:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support now. Happy this version suits you too, MossAlbatross. For information, I did not change the saturation of the picture, only the highlights of the background have been reduced. No pixel has been modified on the shoes. Nice light, initially -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:15, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Agreed. And the background has been carelessly arranged. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:45, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 14:25, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

[OK] New version. Vote changed -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info Pinging @Kritzolina, Aristeas, Daniel Case, Radomianin, Llez, Basile Morin, Charlesjsharp, Karelj as previous voters. This file has now been updated with improvements courtesy of Basile Morin, which I think fall within the guidelines around overwriting existing files so I have not proposed the edited version as an alternative file. However, if any of you would like to withdraw your votes due to the changes in this file, please feel free to do so. I am very grateful for all of your feedback! MossAlbatross (talk) 04:03, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Very happy with this version --Kritzolina (talk) 06:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It’s even better now, thanks. --Aristeas (talk) 07:52, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the new version and Basile's improvement which highlights the fresh character of the scene. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@MossAlbatross: note that you can also support Kritzolina's nomination :-) Basile Morin (talk) 00:51, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think I don't have enough edits to vote? Unless the 50 edits applies across projects and I can count my EnWP edits to my total :) MossAlbatross (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, yes, you're totally right! As you seem rather experimented on Wikipedia, I didn't even check your profile on Commons, but I agree the number of contributions is currently insufficient. See you again in a few weeks, maybe? :-) It looks like your vote won't be essential anyway to make this FPC promoted -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take that as a compliment! Just a long-time lurker benefiting from Kritzolina's encouragement :) but yes, I'll be back to support other nominations soon, thank you so much again for all your support here! MossAlbatross (talk) 17:39, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support The adjustment to the background did it. I don't know if we should consider this digital fakery, though? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

{{Retouched}} added -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:43, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:23, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:56, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Fishing Boat Waves Devaneri Mahabalipuram Sep22 A7C 02637.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2022 at 08:50:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#India
Info Fishing boat putting out to sea from the beach through breaking waves. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 08:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the insouciant stance of the pilot and his companions as the boat appears poised to take flight. -- Tagooty (talk) 08:50, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not a 'rudderman'. As you know, this is a Long-tail. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:38, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: Thanks for the info on the nomenclature, which is new to me. Changed "rudderman" -> "pilot". --Tagooty (talk) 09:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Skilled driver, but I need more space at the lower left corner, and below the wave, for the composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Basile Morin: Thanks for the comment. I've uploaded a new version with more space. Is this composition better? --Tagooty (talk) 02:58, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:11, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I had to think about this one a lot, but the way you captured the morning light meeting the boat as it is starting to rise above the wave makes the difference for me, so I support this. --Kritzolina (talk) 06:13, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive and beautiful to me. Great contrast between the dark silhouettes of the people and the glittering bright tones of the sea. Thanks to Basile for the hint which has helped to improve the composition. --Aristeas (talk) 08:00, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 08:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina and Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:38, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Navneetsharmaiit (talk) 18:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info The image is about fishermen in India taking their boat out to sea for fishing, the boat itself is less important. Hence, I have changed the gallery from Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Boats to Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#India --Tagooty (talk) 02:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Ivar (talk) 15:45, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Boats

File:Nomfusi in Munich 2022 07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2022 at 05:56:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians_and_singers_performing
Info all by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 05:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 05:56, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Powerful image of which I would like to see more for the FP archive. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 09:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great close-up. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:33, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Talking photo, special attitude -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Daniel Case (talk) 03:26, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captures with how much joy she is singing. --Aristeas (talk) 07:56, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful. But I wish it would a little bit sharper (or more details). --XRay 💬 07:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- One of the problems with event photography - the best moments often happen when the light ist not perfect. Dusk was really settling in when I took this shot, but I think with the focus on the microphone and the near eye, I did the best I could under the circumstances. --Kritzolina (talk) 08:48, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:14, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:51, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Ivar (talk) 15:45, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Rathaus Hof (Saale) 20221009 HOF05503cens.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2022 at 12:35:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info The town hall of Hof (Saale), taken on a sunnday in autumn created by PantheraLeo1359531 - uploaded by PantheraLeo1359531 - nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 12:35, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 12:35, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:11, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful composition.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:40, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:47, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The viewing angle is unfavorably steep and the cable is a nuisance. Good but not enough for FP. --Milseburg (talk) 16:12, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed such a viewing angle is always a matter of taste. But it adds a certain dramatic to the building, so I have confess that I actually like it in this case – because the photo is well-done and fine in every respect. And the light and the colours are really beautiful … --Aristeas (talk) 16:43, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:55, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why PNG? There are artifacts around the tower. The source is a JPEG file? Or RAW? --XRay 💬 13:05, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Normal good image, nothing outstanding, maybe QI. -- Karelj (talk) 14:39, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per XRay. PNG is bad practice for this kind of image. Takes up space for nothing. - Benh (talk) 21:57, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose PNG and sky too oversaturated. -- -donald- (talk) 06:35, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers. -- Ivar (talk) 18:52, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Versuch einfach mal, die Farbsättigung etwas zu reduzieren. Die Perspektivkorrektur könnte evt. auch etwas geringer ausfallen. Momentan sieht das Bild für mich zu künstlich aus. Das Motiv ist aber klasse und ich fände es toll, wenn wir davon ein Exzellentes Bild hätten. Ganz herzliche Grüße aus der Ferne, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:30, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as it's a PNG file. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:12, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose proportions are not realistic, see File:Rathausturm Hof 20200214 002.jpg --Stepro (talk) 03:47, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative according to proposals[edit]

Info The town hall of Hof (Saale), taken on a sunday in autumn (with proposals taken into account, thank you all :) ) created by PantheraLeo1359531 - uploaded by PantheraLeo1359531 - nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support this version, but I think it would be better to make a new nomination now since you only have a few days left Cmao20 (talk) 11:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This version is really an improvement. As Cmao20 suggests, it should be fairly nominated separately. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 18:48, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 20:57, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:20180924 UCI Road World Championships Innsbruck Men U23 ITT Timur Malieiev 850 8237.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2022 at 17:28:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual_sports
Info created & uploaded by Granada – nominated by Ivar (talk) 17:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 17:28, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak~~ Support ~~The head is not very sharp.~~ Ok at lower resolution. Aperture chosen F/4 was not optimum in my opinion, with that midday light. Support because the equipment is special -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New upload better. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The original file had no sharpening applied at all. Revamped the photo with a _little_ touch of PhotoAI. --Granada (talk) 07:08, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:42, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! Judging by his tucked position he was going FAST, not an easy shot to take --Julesvernex2 (talk) 11:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 13:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:39, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 17:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:24, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:32, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:00, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:55, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:File, Asuán, Egipto, 2022-04-01, DD 144.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2022 at 18:22:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Egypt
Info The temple for Isis, depicted in this photo, is the most ancient of the Philae temple complex and was built in the reign of Nectanebo I during 380-362 BC. He became the founding pharaoh of the Thirtieth and last native dynasty when he deposed and killed Nepherites II. For the most part, the other ruins date from the Ptolemaic Kingdom, more especially with the reigns of Ptolemy II Philadelphus, Ptolemy V Epiphanes, and Ptolemy VI Philometor (282-145 BC), with many traces of Roman work in Philae dedicated to Ammon-Osiris. The temple complex was located originally on Philae Island, near the expansive First Cataract of the Nile in Upper Egypt. The temple complex was dismantled and moved to nearby Agilkia Island as part of the UNESCO Nubia Campaign project, protecting this and other complexes before the 1970 completion of the Aswan High Dam. Note: again an actually very crowded monument in Egypt without any tourists. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:22, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Too small. I think you must have uploaded the wrong version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:14, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, sorry, right version uploaded, thank you, Ikan Kekek Poco a poco (talk) 10:07, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment imo a few steps to the right would have made this compo more symmetrical. Now it looks like the ground is leaning to the right. -- Ivar (talk) 10:32, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ivar fair point, but I couldn't as there are columns on the right that would have hidden a portion of the right facade. Look at this. As an alternative I could offer this image where nobody should be irritated by the lack of symmetry, what do you think? Poco a poco (talk) 11:34, 21 October 2022 (UTC) PD: Furthermore from this angle you can see the entrance to the next pylon.[reply]

Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 11:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:41, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:54, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support There's a slight amount of color noise in the sky, but I think it would be more trouble than it's worth to fuss with it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:22, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A little bit color noise in the sky and a (minor) trace of a bird or similar in the sky on the left. Please be so kind and have a look. --XRay 💬 07:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek, XRay: sure thing, will address tomorrow night Poco a poco (talk) 10:18, 22 October 2022‎

Done Poco a poco (talk) 21:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support A pretty underrated site, IMO (I haven't been to Egypt but have heard about this site in a social travel blog). --SHB2000 (talk) 07:52, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:19, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The beautiful Philae was one of my favourite sites when I visited Egypt, thank you for the good photo. --Aristeas (talk) 15:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:53, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lathyrus palustris flowers - Kulna.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2022 at 17:32:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Fabaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 17:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 17:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Dinkum (talk) 17:51, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support How a focus-stack should be composed and executed; with great attention to detail. When we nominate focus-stacked images, we must expect detailed scutiny. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:17, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:47, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Golden light -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:18, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 08:02, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 08:07, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:28, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 13:31, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:40, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 17:57, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Granada (talk) 19:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 03:52, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:31, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:37, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:17, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:45, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 12:38, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 20:54, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Tallinn asv2022-04 img56 Kadriorg Palace.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2022 at 22:31:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Painted ceilings
Info Ceiling fresco in Kadriorg Palace / Tallinn, all by me --A.Savin 22:31, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 22:31, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice (and somewhat funny) fresco, excellent photo. --Aristeas (talk) 08:04, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:38, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:25, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support But I miss some information about about the painting and the subject in the description page --Llez (talk) 14:45, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The artist was not the most talented one. :) --Granada (talk) 19:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 03:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:30, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:47, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:36, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:20, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent image --Tagooty (talk) 15:18, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:58, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:10, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Forte da Cruz, Estoril, Portugal, 2022-07-24, DD 04-06 HDR.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2022 at 06:41:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Portugal
Info View of Forte da Cruz during the early blue hour, Estoril, Portugal. The fortress, located in the beach of Tamariz, dates back to the 17th century. It belonged to the coastal lince defense fortifications to protect Lisbon. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 06:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 06:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a strong QI but I don't see the wow here, either in the pallid light or the composition. Would maybe be FP with a less flat and dull sky and with a wider crop on the right Cmao20 (talk) 11:32, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think this has FP potential, if the composition were improved a bit. The horizon is centered for no good reason, and the leading lines from the left don't actually lead anywhere (instead they just exit out the right of the frame), both resulting in a lack of focus. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:23, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice for me. --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ghost on the beach (right side) --Clément Bardot (talk) 13:12, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Cmao20. -- Karelj (talk) 16:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20, King of Hearts, Tournasol7, Clément Bardot, and Karelj: : there is a new version now: ghosts were removed; the crop on top changed to achieve a more balanced result; curves are adjusted (much darker now corresponding to the blue hour after sunset), what do you think? Poco a poco (talk) 17:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Given that the sky is mostly empty, I don't think making the horizon lower is the right thing to do for this image. I would prefer more foreground, with the horizon in the upper third. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:30, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mosbatho (talk) 19:57, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose mostly lacking wow. The birds are gone now, but they are still visible on the water reflection. Also the sand is not natural on some places, where they were cloned out. And some ghosts are still walking on sand. -- Ivar (talk) 15:43, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 18:00, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 18:00, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Geranium pratense 'Galactic' 23-05-2022 (actm.).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2022 at 15:14:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Family Geraniaceae
Info Flower of a geranium pratense 'Galactic'. Focus stack of 17 photos.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:14, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:14, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is difficult to guess what has caused the weird patterns on this image, visible at thumbnail size, but I've seen them before. There are stacking or masking or cloning errors all over the image, giving the impression that the background is artificial. I don't like a black background and am opposing on that basis, but even if you like a black background, this would need a lot of work, including a slightly different crop. Sorry. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. The flower is fine, but he's right about the background ... it really does look like someone tried to mask the background out (Although it's much easier to see in closeup). Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. New version uploaded.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:18, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not fixed, sorry. Maybe you should increase the light to spot the flaws -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:48, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the tip. @Daniel Case: New version.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Plain black, color code #000000 -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:21, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. If I translate your comment, I can't figure it out. Is the background color wrong?--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:42, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think what he means is that you now have a 100% artificial black background. This must be disclosed using the retouched template, but a withdrawal might be easier. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:43, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. correction Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:57, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, from the blue gradient, the color changed to the darkest black, without indication on the file page. I didn't suggest to withdraw, but it is quite a radical way to get rid of these patterns, in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:44, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:59, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 08:05, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't think we should be promoting a straightforward flower focus-stack with a 100% artificial background (now disclosed, thanks). How can this process result in the image being judged 'among the finest images'? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:29, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Note: Obviously you don't have to like a black background. But the subject (the beautiful white flower) stands out nicely against the black background. And the subject is the flower.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:09, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support In my humble view, the artificial background gives a good contrast to the subject, plus it's now indicated by a retouching template on the file page. The slight stacking halos around the stamens are tolerable, imo. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:55, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:23, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:20180109 Vienna State Opera at blue hour 850 9387.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2022 at 16:40:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
Info This is quite old and was shot with the not so sharp Tamron 28-70mm f/2.8. New technology allows me to sharpen it (hope it's not overdone) better and since there's still no FP of the opera in Vienna ... created by Granada - uploaded by Granada - nominated by Granada -- Granada (talk) 16:40, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Granada (talk) 16:40, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Atmospheric capture. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:37, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:25, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Dinkum (talk) 14:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Has an evocative period look. --Tagooty (talk) 15:16, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support It's very good, but the period look is of today, considering the screens and the light trails of motor vehicle traffic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:26, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:54, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Blue hour -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:34, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit tight on the left but really nice Poco a poco (talk) 06:57, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
SupportCmao20 (talk) 11:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:13, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The sharpening in some places gives it a cell phone-esque quality, I think - but whatever, this level of sharpness is perfectly fine for 35 MP. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:26, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:55, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:36, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 07:45, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Тычинка лилейник желтый.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2022 at 16:24:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Xanthorrhoeaceae
Info created and uploaded by Alexander Klepnev - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 16:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:24, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Excellent. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:46, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:02, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great detail but a lot of minor retouching of stacking blur needed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:41, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I guess that Alexander Klepnev is not around to correct the minor errors. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:19, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:49, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:52, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:08, 18 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:28, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:43, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:49, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:40, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 17:58, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:2021-02-12 IBSF World Championships Bobsleigh and Skeleton Altenberg 1DX 3629 by Stepro.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2022 at 04:15:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info for a change, no action in sports, but a still life due to the World Championships without spectators; created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
Support -- Stepro (talk) 04:15, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose-- I don't see anything interesting in this picture. Dinkum (talk) 14:44, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I do: the cheery colors against the white snow. Whether that's enough for an FP is another matter. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:24, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment COM:IG says "images should have a meaningful file name", and I don't find this one very consistent -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I see it differently. It is one of 1427 photos I have uploaded to Commons from this World Championships, has the event extensively in file name, and is very consistent in my opinion. --Stepro (talk) 23:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to disagree. I'm just discovering the hundreds of different pictures with the same file name, contained in the category "4th run", examples:

File:2021-02-12 IBSF World Championships Bobsleigh and Skeleton Altenberg 1DX 3627 by Stepro.jpg

File:2021-02-12 IBSF World Championships Bobsleigh and Skeleton Altenberg 1DX 3631 by Stepro.jpg, etc.

I think that the content is not properly described. It's like naming "Miami 3629" your picture of umbrella, because this umbrella was shot in your session in Miami. Something like "Hut and banners in snow" would be the subject here, IMO -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

So we obviously have different opinions. In my opinion, the description of the content of the photo belongs in the "Description" field in the "Summary" section, and not in the filenames. The filename is supposed to be "meaningful", which I think it is. It is not intended to replace the image description. I couldn't even afford to do this, with uploads of four-digit photo numbers I would need additional days, if not weeks, to fulfill this for me nonsensical requirement. Because it doesn't make any sense to me - the photos can be found without any problems, thanks to a meaningful description of the image in the field provided, through appropriate categorization, and through keywords in the metadata (EXIF, IPTC). In my opinion, I fulfill this in an exemplary manner like hardly any other Commons user. Unfortunately, I'm pretty annoyed by the constant demands that the file names should contain a description of the picture and ideally all the people pictured. Stepro (talk) 01:58, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Please have a look at COM:FN#Naming: "Names should be descriptive, chosen according to what the image displays or contents portray". We have already promoted a picture with the same file name. This one is not descriptive, and not chosen according to what the image displays. Concerning the categorization, people looking for a picture of hut are not going to type "Bobsleigh", logically they're more likely to search in the Category:Huts, where your photo is oddly absent -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have written all what I have to say about this topic. Stepro (talk) 02:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Feel free to improve next time -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question Copyrighted advertisements? As they seem to be the main subject of the picture, COM:DM is not obvious to me. -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Here I beg to differ again.For me, the main motif is not the random advertising on the hut, but the closed hut itself in the snowy surroundings. For me, advertising is an accessory, since it could be replaced by any other motif. Apart from that, the freedom of panorama would be given here, since these billboards are permanently attached there. --Stepro (talk) 23:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Photographically three commercial banners and a partially hidden red sign. A concept that does not particularly appeal me, although I admit selling ice-creams in winter is original :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would choose this photo as a calendar page (maybe I'll do that yet ;-) ), that's why I nominated it here. I have absolutely no problem if others don't see it that way. In general, I don't think that photos proposed here necessarily have to meet with general approval, as long as they are in principle qualified for FPC, I see it positively, even if they are rejected. --Stepro (talk) 23:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Apparently random objects amid a lovely winter scene. For once I can't say I see what the photographer was thinking. Daniel Case (talk) 15:15, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:10, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:12, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yellowstone National Park (WY, USA), Firehole River, Abflusskanal des Excelsior Geysirs -- 2022 -- 2572-4.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2022 at 07:43:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Wyoming
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 07:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thank you to Ikan Kekek for your proposal to nominate this photograph. --XRay 💬 07:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 07:43, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:49, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:26, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking colours --Tagooty (talk) 15:10, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per other supporters. Impressive site I would like to visit someday. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:28, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It has also been my long-held desire to visit Yellowstone National Park someday. The national park is simply impressive. It was a pity that we had only one day because of a thunderstorm. And it is good for viewing the pictures that pictures do not transport any smell. The smell of sulfur would also be impressive. --XRay 💬 15:48, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughts, XRay. Impressive in two ways – yes, I don't doubt it :) We might make it there one day, then it's not far to Montana which is also on my list of desired places. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 16:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:00, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Consistent DoF -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:32, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:19, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:48, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 06:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:31, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:23, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 07:44, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:16, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Зоран Кардула (2021).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2022 at 08:27:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Standing people
Info created by Тиверополник - uploaded by Тиверополник - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good technical quality, but otherwise a routine photo. --Tagooty (talk) 15:14, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Taggoty. Also isn't helped by all that dead space on both sides ... crop it and you've definitely got a QI. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Just okay. Average. Visible vignetting -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:15, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Darcha Padum Road Below Shinku La Lahaul Oct22 A7C 03533.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2022 at 15:45:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#India
Info Darcha-Padum road winding up to Shinku La pass, Lahaul, Himachal, India. Elevations: Camera 4,975m (16,322'), pass 5,065 m (16,617 ft), peaks about 5,600m (18,375'). This road was recently completed by the Border Roads Organization over about 10 years in extreme conditions including unstable fragmented sedimentary strata. Work is only possible during the summer months, cold, snow and avalanches cause damage every winter. Created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 15:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 15:45, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:03, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing capture! Worthy of fp --Navneetsharmaiit (talk) 18:40, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:56, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice view and composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 06:40, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:48, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 06:55, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:25, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:19, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:31, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:27, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 17:57, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 03:21, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:00, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:43, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:24, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:07, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 15:04, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:28, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:41, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 07:43, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:19, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Bad Harzburg asv2022-06 img24 Trinkhalle.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2022 at 12:19:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info Interior view of spa hall and pump room (Trink- und Wandelhalle) in Bad Harzburg, Lower Saxony -- all by me -A.Savin 12:19, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:19, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:00, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cut chandelier on the top, and cropped plant at the left. The quality is clearly good, but the composition does not convince me. Busy interior. Partially hidden statue and shelf. Too many lines. Cluttered in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Regretfully I agree with the above this time, not your best interior; there is plenty to like but the composition and perspective are not convincing Cmao20 (talk) 12:33, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I sadly have to agree with Basile. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:49, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination --A.Savin 13:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Situs Leopoliensis. Per Fridericum Getkant recognitus. A 1635. Septemb.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2022 at 08:21:00 (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 Fridericum Getkant - uploaded by Arxivist - nominated by Arxivist -- Arxivist (talk) 08:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Arxivist (talk) 08:21, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question What's the wow factor in this image? --SHB2000 (talk) 10:19, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not sure it matters. The image is not of FP quality. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Indeed very interesting for the history of Lviv, but we would need a high-quality scan if we want to make a featured picture of it, sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 18:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, as we need pinpoint sharpness of a map for FP, but please nominate to COM:VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:44, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 01:40, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Alexander-93 (talk) 07:42, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spinifex Pigeon 0A2A1585.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2022 at 11:47:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Columbidae (Pigeons and Doves)
Info A beautiful photo of a very distinctive bird; no FPs of this species. created by JJ Harrison - uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:07, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 12:25, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 12:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 12:54, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Granada (talk) 13:02, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dinkum (talk) 14:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool guy. --Aristeas (talk) 18:01, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:43, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Otávio Astor Vaz Costa (talk) 21:52, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Shining unicorn :-) Basile Morin (talk) 03:14, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 03:18, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 03:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:35, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 08:00, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:48, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:27, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:23, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 12:24, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 15:04, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:40, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alexander-93 (talk) 07:41, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:59, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:16, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A tiger-like bird and it makes quality and sharpen it good. Maanshen (talk) 16:18, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 05:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 31 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Columbidae (Pigeons and Doves)

File:Tikkurila Old railway station or city museum in night illumination in Tikkurila, Vantaa, Finland, 2022 October.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2022 at 07:29:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Finland
Info created & uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:29, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:29, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:14, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:52, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I really like it, but I'm troubled by the two ovals in the sky on the left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:09, 19 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:11, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is it the 17mm lens that has caused the distortion e.g. the oval moon? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:36, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 14:37, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I'm afraid the top left part of the building is too distorted, it spoils the compo IMHO, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 17:32, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 05:36, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:33, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose There is a lot to like here, but overall I agree with Poco, the distortion is too annoying Cmao20 (talk) 11:25, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:25, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Lichfield Cathedral High Altar from choir, Staffordshire, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2022 at 11:47:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#United Kingdom
Info Already FP on English wikipedia but not here; high quality photo of one of the few ancient English cathedrals as yet to have no FPs. Gets a good sense of the imposing and expansive architecture. created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:47, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive photo of a very impressive cathedral. --Aristeas (talk) 18:02, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:12, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:42, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:20, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 03:25, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:35, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 07:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:22, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:53, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful! --Tagooty (talk) 13:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:22, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:09, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:12, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:40, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 09:00, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:09, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 19:37, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 05:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:27, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Muiden, Muiderslot. 09-05-2022. (actm.) 07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2022 at 15:11:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Netherlands
Info Muiden Castle in the Netherlands, located at the mouth of the Vecht river, some 15 kilometers southeast of Amsterdam, in Muiden,
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very nice castle, but the blue board is annoying. --A.Savin 19:31, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I tried to clone the board, but unfortunately it didn't work.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:32, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support For me the blue board is not annoying, it is that slight distraction from perfection that tells us this is a real picture of a real place and not some alternate reality --Kritzolina (talk) 06:33, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I have to agree with Kritzolina on the blue board. It gives me a signal that I can actually visit this place, and it isn't some old castle that's off the beaten path. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:08, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:00, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina and SHB2000. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice pic but the bottom crop is a little bit tight for me Cmao20 (talk) 12:24, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kirtzolina. Daniel Case (talk) 18:21, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Kritzolina and Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 05:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support But please remove the spot (see note) --Llez (talk) 14:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Removed spot. Thank you for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:31, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:07, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:20, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Gekraagde aardster (Geastrum triplex) 09-10-2022. (d.j.b) 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2022 at 05:03:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Geastraceae
Info Ripe Geastrum between fallen leaves. Focus stack of 18 photos.}}
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:03, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:03, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 06:10, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:17, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose this image has same postprocessing problems as previous nomination (posterization and blurred parts outside the main subject). -- Ivar (talk) 08:40, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, the same problems, but also careless stacking. In a typical focus stack with the background distant from the subject, the software will leave blurred 'halos'. These must be rectified manually. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:12, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Uploaded a new version. For information. This fungus (rather rare in the Netherlands) lies flat on the humus-rich soil. The immediate surroundings therefore also become more or less sharp.--Famberhorst (talk) 14:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support for the improved version. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:30, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think I cleared cache; I don't see any difference. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:53, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Tip: Then you should first view the old photo and then the new one. Or you need to refresh the page.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:42, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The new version is much improved but there are still small out-of-focus areas from stacking. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:30, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support much better -- Ivar (talk) 17:49, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support new version is much better --Granada (talk) 19:29, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support this version, per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice geometrical shapes, and I agree the new version is considerably improved -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:33, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:35, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 15:55, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:50, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:15, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 19:38, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alien inspired --Wilfredor (talk) 17:10, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:19, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:06, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Warsaw University of Technology, main building.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2022 at 08:35:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Walls
Info Illuminated front facade of the main building of the Warsaw University of Technology, Poland. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Radomianin (talk) 08:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:35, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Is it not possible to stand further back for this shot? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:20, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for your question, Charles. Surely a capture from a more distant position is possible, but I personally found this perspective especially appealing. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 09:38, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I understand why Radomianin chose thes perspective, it is something different and interesting --Kritzolina (talk) 18:16, 21 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 07:46, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The slight slant is quite obvious. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:50, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review, SHB2000. If by slant you mean perspective, that's intentional. Otherwise, there is no tilt in the horizontal and vertical directions. If you draw guiding lines in an image editing program, you can see that the image is aligned correctly. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 08:40, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:23, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support We can take good photographs of buildings either with straight verticals or with an dramatic angle looking up or down (and should avoid the “neither fish nor flesh” accidentally leaning verticals); this is a successful example for a dramatic “looking up” architecture detail. --Aristeas (talk) 15:27, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the yellow tint. Yann (talk) 18:08, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review, Yann. The illumination of the main building at night is indeed very prominent. A web search for similar photos of the building reveals this. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 18:28, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:36, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support fine by me, it does look tilted at first glance but I think it's an optical illusion Cmao20 (talk) 11:29, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't love this angle because it makes the sculptures above the "Politechnika" sign blurry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:02, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review, Ikan. That's certainly a drawback of extreme shooting angles. My primary attention and the focus were on the illuminated facade, not on the sculpture. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 03:45, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:50, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 20:38, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Very decent image, but I don't find the content really great. The sculpture on the top is partially hidden. Very ordinary architecture in my view (there are tons of city halls, theaters and administration buildings of the same style in Europe). The perspective is not very attractive. The range of colors is extremely reduced. No wow, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your subjective counterarguments, which I do not share, though. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 05:38, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't find the sculpture partially hidden ? What do you mean? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:48, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your query, the sculpture is partially hidden - you're right on that point, of course, but it wasn't my primary focus for the photo subject. I was concentrating on the illuminated main facade and focused on it. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 06:12, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps blue hour missing. I supported this one, which also had a statue on the top -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:58, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your note, Basile. A very nice photo that you have supported. However, it has a frontal perspective. Had I chosen this one, the statue of the university building would also be clearly and distinctly visible. However, my perspective did not allow this. My intention was to choose a different angle to create an extreme dynamic. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 07:11, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Static view from below in my humble opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:30, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Basile. Strong QI, not FP. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:21, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:08, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Templo de Ramsés II, Abu Simbel, Egipto, 2022-04-02, DD 26-28 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2022 at 18:19:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Egypt
Info Famous sanctuary of the temple of Ramses II, Abu Simbel, Egypt. The Great Temple at Abu Simbel, which took about twenty years to build, was completed around year 24 of the reign of Ramesses the Great (which corresponds to 1265 BC). It was dedicated to the gods Amun, Ra-Horakhty, and Ptah, as well as to the deified Ramesses himself. It is generally considered the grandest and most beautiful of the temples commissioned during the reign of Ramesses II, and one of the most beautiful in Egypt. In the sanctuary are rock cut sculptures of four seated figures: Ra-Horakhty, the deified king Ramesses, and the gods Amun Ra and Ptah, the main divinities in that period. It is believed that the axis of the temple was positioned by the ancient Egyptian architects in such a way that on October 22 and February 22 (allegedly the king's birthday and coronation day, respectively), the rays of the sun would penetrate the sanctuary and illuminate the sculptures on the back wall, except for the statue of Ptah, a god connected with the realm of the dead, who always remained in the dark. People gather at Abu Simbel on these days to witness this. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I'm not fond of the lighting, but I do like the crisp level of detail. If anything, I'm slightly leaning towards weak support. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:06, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This one doesn't look much at thumbnail but at full size it is very interesting. And the lighting seems more understandable given the image description Cmao20 (talk) 12:27, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, and darn those 19th-century graffiti artists! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:31, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 05:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:17, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:23, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:06, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:36, 30 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:06, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Monasterio de los Jerónimos, Lisboa, Portugal, 2022-07-24, DD 38-40 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Nov 2022 at 21:21:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Portugal
Info Jerónimos Monastery (in Portuguese «Mosteiro dos Jerónimos»), Lisboa, Portugal. The former monastery of the Order of Saint Jerome near the Tagus river became the necropolis of the Portuguese royal dynasty of Aviz in the 16th century but was secularized on 28 December 1833 by state decree and its ownership transferred to the charitable institution, Real Casa Pia de Lisboa. It's one of the most prominent examples of the late Portuguese Gothic Manueline style of architecture in Lisbon. It was erected in the early 1500s near the launch point of Vasco da Gama's first journey, and its construction funded by a tax on the profits of the yearly Portuguese India Armadas. In 1880, da Gama's remains and those of the poet Luís de Camões, were moved to new carved tombs in the nave of the monastery's church, only a few meters away from the tombs of the kings Manuel I and John III, whom da Gama had served. In 1983, the Jerónimos Monastery was classified as a UNESCO World Heritage Site, along with the nearby Tower of Belém. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:21, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:21, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Mosbatho (talk) 22:19, 25 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 04:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:27, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 07:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:22, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perfeito ! --SHB2000 (talk) 11:05, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 19:34, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:06, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:31, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 10:32, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support One of your very best Cmao20 (talk) 12:29, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 05:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:55, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Masterpiece --Wilfredor (talk) 17:08, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:26, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:05, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:50, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Bycanistes subcylindricus (Black-and-white-casqued hornbill) head, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2022 at 05:44:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Lateral
Frontal

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Bucerotidae (Hornbills)
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 05:44, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 05:44, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately, this captive bird may have abnormalities. In the 'side on' image, the bill appears foreshortened, giving a misleading appearance. In a true side-on view the beak should be much longer. In the 'head on' shot, the eyes are different sizes, so the image is not head-on, implying that the bill is distorted. The reflection of the aviary roof in the eye must be unavoidable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:13, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment I don't agree. Compared with other representatives of the species the bill is in the normal range. --Llez (talk) 12:06, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:01, 22 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:49, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the set. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:09, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Educative set showing the same specimen from two different angles -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:04, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:31, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:22, 23 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:23, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 10:54, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wieggy (talk) 17:08, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The side view, at least, seems poorly processed. The further left you get on the head the more noisy and unnatural (not just unsharp; I might be able to forgive that) the feathers get until you reach the extremely artifact-y left side. Again, this might be something I could understand—if it were a rare bird caught in the wild. But it's not. Daniel Case (talk) 22:11, 24 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:30, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Yellow-bellied Flyrobin 0A2A7419.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2022 at 06:55:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Petroicidae_(Australasian_Robins)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 06:55, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 06:55, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 10:48, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Poor salience, but otherwise nice. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:04, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Micha (talk) 19:33, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:18, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cute. The gradient background is painterly -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition and colors. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:41, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:32, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support great shot --Stepro (talk) 05:22, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 05:52, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:51, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:56, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:55, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:48, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:28, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:04, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Dinkum (talk) 16:13, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow, the background too has a thing somewhat special. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:28, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual bokeh adds to the effect --Tagooty (talk) 07:49, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:30, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Acer negundo female flowers - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2022 at 07:03:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Sapindaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 07:03, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:03, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 11:03, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:57, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:36, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:07, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:17, 26 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very detailed. Nice light, and smooth background -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:30, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:35, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:32, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolf im Wald 16:36, 27 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 05:22, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 05:53, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 14:56, 28 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:30, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 12:04, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:32, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:26, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:31, 31 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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