Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 12 2023

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Vietri_sul_Mare,_Italia,_2023-03-26,_DD_36.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Vietri sul Mare, Italy --Poco a poco 07:09, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Mike Peel 20:34, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Some dust spots in the sky to remove and slightly too bright IMO --Ermell 20:37, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
    ✓ Done --Poco a poco 21:02, 4 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment A nice view and composition, but a little dull imo. It would benefit much from improving contrast. -- Alvesgaspar 16:36, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support New version looks really good. --Plozessor 18:55, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Nearly perfect.--Ermell 21:14, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Info I removed the assumed opposing vote above because you clearly support the image now. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 23:56, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good photo. -- Ikan Kekek 09:14, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support --Ermell 09:37, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 20:32, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Facade of the Palazzo Calabritto - Napoli.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Palazzo Calabritto - Napoli --PaestumPaestum 19:53, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Plozessor 05:54, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't like the top crop. Let's see what others think. --Sebring12Hrs 10:04, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Thanks. --Sebring12Hrs 13:53, 10 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  OpposeI agree, it appears to be a very random crop. --ArildV 13:55, 3 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support minor issue. --Smial 12:14, 6 November 2023 (UTC)  Comment Suggestion: Cut off just above the gutter, rename it "Facade of the Palazzo_Calabritto_-_Napoli.jpg" and - bingo, QI... --Smial 17:40, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't like it either -- Alvesgaspar 16:30, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Perfectly logical place to crop, in my opinion, and the composition works for me, but at any rate, I give some latitude to the artist and the photo is certainly technically OK. -- Ikan Kekek 09:16, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Oh, I see where it used to be cropped. I understand the previous opposition now! -- Ikan Kekek 00:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
  • No problem ! ;) --Sebring12Hrs 11:45, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 20:33, 11 November 2023 (UTC)

File:ANA_Cargo,_Frankfurt_am_Main_(P1090462).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Boeing 777F of ANA Cargo taking off from runway 25C of Frankfurt Airport --MB-one 11:38, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality -- Spurzem 12:53, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Low detail even in thumbnail size. --Kallerna 13:28, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Sometimes I don't understand the criticism, just as I don't understand some of the praise for failed pictures. -- Spurzem 16:54, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Weak support This is a bit soft, especially in the right part, but good enough for QI IMO. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 18:52, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Soft, borderlinish to me, but there seems to be some COM:CA on the front of the engines and the nose. -- Ikan Kekek 21:20, 1 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Seeing this like Ikan Kekek - picture could be slightly sharpened, and there seems some slight CA in the front. If you can fix that, I would support it as a QI. --Plozessor 17:10, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Thanks for the suggestions. Uploaded a new version. --MB-one 13:53, 6 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Strange textures... Overprocessed... --Sebring12Hrs 09:41, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
 Comment. I'm always amazed at what some people see in some pictures, but sometimes don't see. -- Spurzem 17:18, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
Your message is clearly addressed to me. Please don't be so provocative. --Sebring12Hrs 23:21, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support New version is ok for me. --Plozessor 18:54, 7 November 2023 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support Somewhat soft (denoising?), somewhat oversharpened, but good enough for an A4 size print. --Smial 09:09, 8 November 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Thanks. Good quality to me now, though there is still just a bit of CA on an engine. -- Ikan Kekek 08:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 20:31, 11 November 2023 (UTC)