Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 29 2014

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Consensual review[edit]

File:Jute_flower.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination jute flower in alaveddi, jaffna , northern province, sri lanka --Aathavan jaffna 14:31, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Maathavan 15:01, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not sharp. --P e z i 23:25, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I am sorry, I agree with Pezi: most parts of the blossom are out of focus and focus is QI criteria. Maybe you can do another shoot with bigger f-stop (higher depth of field)--J. Lunau 09:50, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Cccefalon 05:00, 28 April 2014 (UTC)

File:Ta_Keo,_Angkor,_Camboya,_2013-08-16,_DD_01.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Ta Keo, Angkor, Cambodia --Poco a poco 18:04, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    Slightly tilted clockwise maybe? The trees are a bit iffy I think. Mattbuck 21:35, 7 April 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ Tilted Poco a poco 20:49, 8 April 2014 (UTC)
  • Promotion Not that sharp, I'm afraid. And the red tee-shirt is really distracting.--Jebulon 16:04, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
    Please, let's discuss, the T-shirt problem is gone, and sharpness is IMHO good enough for QI --Poco a poco 20:13, 11 April 2014 (UTC)
     Neutral Harsh contrast and dust spot (see note). Could be nice too geolocation and links to wiki  Support Betters now, well done --The Photographer 16:43, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  • I added the geodata and removed a dust spot (after a note of Christian Ferrer) Poco a poco 18:03, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support well done post processing, QI for me --J. Lunau 09:24, 24 April 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support --Christian Ferrer 15:59, 27 April 2014 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Cccefalon 04:56, 28 April 2014 (UTC)