Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 18 2017

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Tour_Hassan_a_Rabat_P1060435.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Hassan Tower, Rabat. By User:Pline --Reda benkhadra 02:49, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. The detail on the two horse riders just isn't there. --Lucasbosch 09:24, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree, worse photos were getting QI --Jacek Halicki 09:55, 12 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment@Pline: Left side of tower slightly tilted which if resolved (perspective adjustment) without detriment to the rest of the image would make this QI for me. --Scotch Mist 10:26, 13 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Not quite my standard, but OK. --A.Savin 19:05, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support I agree A.Savin -- DerFussi 21:19, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 23:33, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

File:2016_Kuala_Lumpur,_Świątynia_taoistyczna_Guan_Di_(08).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Guan Di Taoist Temple. Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. --Halavar 20:20, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment Seems oversaturated colors--Moroder 15:59, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
    ✓ Done New, fixed version uploaded. Please take a look again. --Halavar 18:37, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment OK, but now on a second look the composition, especially the top crop seems very unfortunate because you have space on the sides and you cut off the top. I believe we should go to CR with this picture? Cheers --Moroder 07:29, 10 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Yes, we should go to CR. --Halavar 12:44, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unfortunate crop.--Peulle (talk) 17:27, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 23:34, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Niepolomice_09_-_Castle_Canon.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Canon with Korczak Crest in Courtyard of Hunting Castle in Niepołomice, near Kraków --Scotch Mist 11:56, 4 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Distortion at top --Daniel Case 05:42, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment @Daniel Case: Thank you for your review - if the previously cropped image was reverted to, or the image re-cropped, do you consider the image of the canon itself (without the courtyard wall) sufficient for QI? --Scotch Mist 16:03, 8 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Good view of that cannon, no problem with the background, as it is not a photo of an architectural object. If the perspective of that background would be corrected, the main object would be distorted absurdly. --Smial 23:54, 14 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Smial. In fact, the top can be cropped. --Peulle 17:43, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support per Smial and Peulle. Cropping out the top is a good idea. -- Ikan Kekek 18:57, 15 January 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 23:35, 17 January 2017 (UTC)