Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 09 2018

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Santuario_de_Nuestra_Señora_del_Pueyo_(Belchite,_España)_02.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Our Lady of Pueyo Sanctuary --Nerve net 15:04, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Quality is good but it seems that the building is leaning to the right and there are a lot of dust spots in the sky --Podzemnik 15:28, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 00:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  OpposeQuality is very good but dust spots in the sky doesn't acceptable--Armenak Margarian 05:29, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support The dust spots are small. Fix them, and then this will be a QI. -- Ikan Kekek 05:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Dusts spots and chromatic aberration removed. --Nerve net 16:59, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Good quality. Podzemnik and Armenak Margarian, do you have any objection to changing this file's status to "Promotion"? -- Ikan Kekek 00:07, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment I'm sorry Ikan Kekek I didn't know if I could change status but I think it's too late now. For me it's a good quality--Armenak Margarian 12:44, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment - You're welcome to vote if you like. -- Ikan Kekek 23:17, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Weak Pro. Something is wrong with bot or html-frame...and nobody see not correct perspective and colour-temp for such a sunny california pic, but poco pushed this style, means really enough for commons...--Hans-Jürgen Neubert 17:34, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 20:19, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Karmazari_Pench_National_Park_20.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Tigers at Karmazari Pench National Park--Fitindia 05:56, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Ercé 06:42, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - I disagree. Too unsharp and noisy at such a small size. -- Ikan Kekek 11:36, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ikan.--Peulle 08:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ikan.----Fischer.H 18:02, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 09:02, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Sunset_Toronto_Skyline_Panorama_from_Snake_Island.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Panorama of the Toronto skyline at sunset taken from the Snake Islands of the Toronto Islands. --Jchmrt 03:12, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. It's unsharp. --XRay 04:23, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. Sharpness is ok in my eyes for QI, maybe partly a bit noisy. The resolution is rather high and I´m sure that it´s worth to discuss. --Milseburg 16:19, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I'll check it again within the next days. May be the download was not complete. I checked the image twice and it was completely unsharp. --XRay 17:58, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Sorry, checked with another computer. It's sharp enough. A little bit noise and EXIF data missing, but acceptable. --XRay 18:15, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Certainly one vote per user is enough :-) please XRay strike one of both -- Basile Morin 01:43, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
  • I'd voted only one time. The first vote was striked out. I don't know who removed the tags. --XRay 10:30, 7 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 09:01, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Open_wing_position_of_Herona_marathus_marathus_Doubleday,_1848_–_Assam_Pasha_DSC_0076.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Open wing position of Herona marathus marathus Doubleday, 1848 – Assam Pasha (by Sandipoutsider) --Atudu 17:58, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Seven Pandas 18:39, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Too blurry. Sorry --Ermell 09:05, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree. The 2016 standards for insects is higher than this.--Peulle 09:55, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. Noisy, too. --Basotxerri 16:00, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek 05:53, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Blurry, unrepresentive. Better quality images for 2018's images of insects unfortunately. --EurovisionNim 10:46, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 09:00, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Khatchkar_noravank.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Khatchkar near Noravank monastery, Armenia --Armenak Margarian 20:19, 18 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment A bit blueish and looks a bit oversharpened yet unsharp. Fixable? --C messier 15:10, 24 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  CommentNot so fastǃ imho not a big deal. Try to get more saturation (stones) and play a little bit with graduation in S-Line. I can imagine it´s possible to improve it really. For a workout is DNG needed (a free converter with exif data) Regards, --Hans-Jürgen Neubert 22:17, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment Feel free to set it to discussionǃ From my side it´s one of ur better ones, I like it. But no sense when I graduatee my own derivate work. Keep on shootingǃ --Hans-Jürgen Neubert 22:19, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. ----Hans-Jürgen Neubert 13:44, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose IMO not sharp enough for a QI. --Basotxerri 15:59, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Looks fine. No need to sharpen --EurovisionNim 02:42, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Looks weird to me. Unsharp and somehow overprocessed? These khachkars are beautiful, so I'd like to see a better photo of them. -- Ikan Kekek 05:54, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ikan Kekek----Fischer.H 18:07, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 08:49, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Corvus_splendens_headshot_2.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination A headshot of a House Crow (Corvus splendens), Kuala Lumpur. --GerifalteDelSabana 06:21, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Dark. Bad light. Details lost in the shadows --Basile Morin 07:58, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for QI I think. --Ermell 23:00, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Large closeup and I don't think it's really close to the line. Good quality, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 21:39, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Basile Morin, except to add that there must be a photographic error that may compromise the image, not a QI to me, I've seen better examples EurovisionNim 14:18, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  • @EurovisionNim: Could you please elaborate on and point out the "photographic error" that you see? Thank you. --GerifalteDelSabana 15:46, 4 December 2018 (UTC)

 Oppose Per Basile Morin. Greetings --Dirtsc 15:13, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 08:47, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Βόρεια_είσοδος_Κνωσού_0582.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination North entrance of Knosos. --C messier 12:49, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment There are violet borders along the trees and CAs at the left side, correctable --Llez 23:33, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Basile Morin 00:14, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose For the moment, CAs and violet borders still not corrected --Llez 06:28, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  • Missed that, yes I agree with Llez, please fix the CA -- Basile Morin 06:52, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Basile Morin 08:41, 5 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Bactrocera_08501.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Bactrocera sp --Vengolis 03:21, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Seven Pandas 03:26, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Insufficient quality for a QI. --Syed07 04:47, 30 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Eyes sharp, even most of the insect's body, IMO acceptable. Maybe the image would benefit from a tighter crop. Overall quite yellow, is the WB correct? --Basotxerri 17:43, 1 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Blurry on one end, not the best QI. Maybe next time --EurovisionNim 15:49, 2 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - Very good photo of the insect. I don't understand the opposing votes. -- Ikan Kekek 08:47, 3 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support No doubt a QI. --Palauenc05 12:29, 4 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Neutral Pro, I follow Basotxerri --Hans-Jürgen Neubert 13:03, 8 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Basotxerri 08:46, 8 December 2018 (UTC)

File:Marburg_Stadtansicht_4.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination City of Marburg --Hydro 13:16, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Michael32710 22:26, 26 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Especially since the resolution is lower than the camera offers, I expect more sharpness. It´s to blurry in detail. --Milseburg 13:44, 27 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment The image appears too strong denoised and at the same time oversharpened. --Smial 10:45, 28 November 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support Regardless of whatever camera used, this is really good quality. Well done. Also noise isn't really such a big deal with this image. It happens from time to time --EurovisionNim 03:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others. Far from QI. (@Smial: did you mean to vote or make a comment?) --Peulle 08:05, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Comment. Sometimes I don't vote. Intentionally. --Smial 09:17, 6 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Milseburg. --Dirtsc 15:09, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Milseburg. ----Fischer.H 18:11, 5 December 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Basotxerri 08:44, 8 December 2018 (UTC)