Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 18 2017

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:2017-02-26_Dajana_Eitberger_by_Sandro_Halank.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Dajana Eitberger beim Rennrodel-Weltcup der Damen in Altenberg 2017 --Sandro Halank 10:02, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • OK, albeit low resuloution --Peulle 11:12, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Yes, low resolution. Below 2Mpix is ineligible for QI. And even in this resolution, still missing sharpness --A.Savin 16:36, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - 2 MP is a hard limit for jpegs, no ifs ands or buts. -- Ikan Kekek 17:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It's true; I used the QIVote helper and trusted it to tell me if it was too low, but it didn't.--Peulle 07:33, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 00:34, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

File:MIA._(Traumzeit_Festival_2014)_IMGP4141_smial_wp.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination MIA. beim Traumzeit Festival 2014 in Duisburg. Mieze Katz --Smial 23:37, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Nice photo, however, composition-wise the mic is cut. It would have been better if it wouldn't appear at all --Ruthven 14:05, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Seriously? --Smial 19:18, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Composition and quality is fine, mic is important to show that a singer is shown - even if it's cut. -- Achim Raschka 05:41, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - Very good portrait, and wow, who cares (well, apparently Ruthven) about the entire mic not being there? The mic is a prop, not the subject of the photo, and enough of it is there. -- Ikan Kekek 04:54, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for me. There are other items of stage props, also cut in the background, it is hard not to get such in a stage photo. --W.carter 13:22, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 00:32, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Βορίζια 8824.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination View of Vorizia, Crete. --C messier 12:56, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Nice composition, but unfortunately is nothing sharp --Michielverbeek 06:13, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done New, sharpened version. --C messier 11:38, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Indeed, it is looking a bit better, a weak  Support --Michielverbeek 07:43, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  • If the village, specifically, is the subject of the photo and we're considering whether it documents the village sharply, I think it's probably too hazy for QI. But my feeling is that regardless of the name, this is a photo of a view on a hazy day that includes a couple of villages. On that basis, I consider it a very good landscape photo and easily a QI. But it really depends on how you look at it, so overall, moderate  Support. -- Ikan Kekek 17:38, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 20:40, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

File:Ziordia - Iglesia 03.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Church of Ziordia, backside. Navarra, Spain --Basotxerri 16:17, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Ermell 19:45, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, parts of the photo are too hazy for me --Michielverbeek 19:48, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Yes, that part of the wall looks different, but IMHO, this is how it really looks. --C messier 11:39, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support, taking C messier's word for it. -- Ikan Kekek 15:51, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment I don't think that it's a lens failure, please look at this: File:Ziordia - Iglesia 02.jpg. You can see the spot of the wall on a different part of the lens. --Basotxerri 16:51, 14 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support I believe that is caused by water damage to the wall. The photo itself seems OK.--Peulle 11:31, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support I see no issue in this photo, I take this opportunity to say that this Panasonic camera seems really a good one, especially in good hand of course. --Christian Ferrer 17:57, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 20:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)