Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 07 2017

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Harebells_at_Hoffler_Creek_LR.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Harebells at Hoffler Creek --PumpkinSky 01:04, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 02:57, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't like it being sharp on the stem and not on the surrounding blossoms. --Granada 21:13, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too much of the plant is unsharp, IMO.--Peulle 11:13, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 12:39, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

File:2016-12_Monts_Valin_winter_-_sunset_12.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Landscape completely frozen at the sunset in Winter in the Monts-Valin National Park, Quebec, Canada. --0x010C 22:01, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. -- PumpkinSky 23:07, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, but I disagree. Apart from the CAs and the lens flare, great part of the image is out of focus. If focus was on the trees, I probably could live with it but it's too much in front. --Basotxerri 13:59, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Baso.--Peulle 11:14, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 12:41, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Calving_in_Laos_(1_of_9).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Cow giving birth. Placenta coming out of the vulva. --Basile Morin 02:38, 25 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 08:38, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree, sorry. The photograph needs perspective correction. --XRay 08:34, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  • True. ✓ Done, thanks -- Basile Morin 10:34, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Neutral Better, but still minor perspective issues. And minor JPEG artifacts too. --XRay 20:20, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - Blurry object in the lower left corner is a bit distracting, but I think the picture is of acceptable quality, overall. -- Ikan Kekek 11:38, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 12:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Pont Valentre 25.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Pont Valentré in Cahors, Lot, France. --Tournasol7 08:53, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Nice but the sharpening is too high, can you reduce it? Poco a poco 09:19, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  •  Not done PumpkinSky 03:06, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support PRO! High Contrast and Picmaker is leading viewers eyes, as it should be. If m the editor I will not change anything. Indeed a QI --Hans-Jürgen Neubert 06:12, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment I wasn't sure how to score the votes here, but I take it that Poco would vote against the current version while PumpkinSky was executing that decision.--Peulle 16:28, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support QI IMO--Ermell 08:49, 5 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - Looks much better than many other QIs, to my eyes, but I'd like to know where the oversharpening is. -- Ikan Kekek 08:27, 6 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --PumpkinSky 18:42, 6 December 2017 (UTC)

File:Reinhart Heinrich, Biophysiker (1) - Mutter Erde fec.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Grave of German biophysicist Reinhart Heinrich in Berlin-Prenzlauer Berg --Mutter Erde 07:44, 24 November 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. PumpkinSky 03:05, 2 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry PumpkinSky, but IMO this image requires at least a perspective correction, both side are leaning out. --Basotxerri 14:53, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose And it's been downscaled to make it look better. --Granada 21:01, 3 December 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others.--Peulle 11:18, 4 December 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 12:40, 6 December 2017 (UTC)