Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 24 2022

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Mt_Feathertop_panorama.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Panorama of Mount Feathertop in Alpine National Park, Victoria (by Brett Stanley) --SHB2000 11:11, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Overprocessed. --Peulle 11:57, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
  • I disagree. According to the description, this place naturally looks like this (and I remember seeing a similar photo that I can confirm was not edited IRL). --SHB2000 22:18, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose strange, unnatural colors --Milseburg 22:31, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Looks oversaturated, and it's definitely heavily posterized, especially in the sky. -- Ikan Kekek 03:37, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Strong oppose Per others. --Sebring12Hrs 08:49, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Шманьківці,_Каплиця_Святого_Миколая,_1617.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Saint Nicholas chapel in Shmankivtsi. --Максим Огородник 08:53, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --SHB2000 10:02, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Generally oversharpened and IMO it is better to crop the unsharp front. --Michielverbeek 10:05, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Michiel and also because of dust spots in the sky. -- Ikan Kekek 03:47, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Jerman_Beach,_Kuta,_Bali,_Indonesia,_20220825_1331_0833.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Jerman Beach, Kuta, Bali, Indonesia --Jakubhal 07:36, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality --Michielverbeek 08:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose tree top right --Charlesjsharp 20:49, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  • I do not think it was real problem here, but ok @Charlesjsharp: , I have uploaded the new version --Jakubhal 12:35, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 03:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Cayambe 10:13, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 11:47, 23 December 2022 (UTC)

File:Marcq_1_3_av_petite_hollande.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Twin houses, Avenue de la Petite Hollande 1 & 3, Marcq-en-Barœul, France --Velvet 08:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose The car in the front spoils the compo in my opinion --Poco a poco 10:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support In a city, it is realy difficult to have no cars in front of a construction. For me, good quality. --Jmh2o 17:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Very sharp, good perspective, and per Jmh2o. --Sebring12Hrs 11:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The car is cropped and I miss the bottom of the car. A cropped dar at the left or right is mostly no problem for me --Michielverbeek 19:30, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support The house is the object of the photo - and that is well shot. --Zinnmann 20:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The cars are truncated and cover a part of the building. --F. Riedelio 07:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The presence of the cars is forgivable to me, but look at the aggressive noise on the parts of the door on the right that are in shadow, etc. -- Ikan Kekek 03:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:46, 23 December 2022 (UTC)