Commons:Candidatas a imágenes destacadas

Aquí están las candidatas a imágenes destacadas

Ten en cuenta que todo el proceso se realiza en inglés por lo que necesitarás conocimientos mínimos de éste para poder presentar una nueva nominación.

Formalidades

Nominación

Si crees que hay alguna foto en Commons lo suficientemente atractiva como para estar entre las imágenes destacadas, entonces por favor inclúyela en la lista de candidaturas editando este enlace. Si hay consenso general después de 10 días, la imagen se transferirá a imágenes destacadas.

Crear una nueva nominación

Paso 1: copia el nombre de la imagen y pégalo en este cuadro (incluyendo el prefijo Image: ), cuando ya hayas pegado el nombre de la imagen, por ejemplo: Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:EL-NOMBRE-DE-TU-IMAGEN.JPG. Haz clic en el botón crear nueva nominación.

Paso 2: Sigue las instrucciones que verás en la página para rellenar los campos de información de tu imagen.

Paso 3: Manualmente inserta un enlace a la página que has creado sobre tu imagen arriba del todo en Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Haz clic aquí, y añade la siguiente línea ARRIBA en la página de nominaciones:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:EL-NOMBRE-DE-TU-IMAGEN.JPG}}

Para votar

Para votar puedes usar las siguientes plantillas:

{{Support}} ( Support),
{{Oppose}} ( Oppose),
{{Neutral}} ( Neutral),
{{Comment}} ( Comment),
{{Info}} ( Info),
{{Question}} ( Question).

Puedes indicar que una imagen no puede ser destacada con {{FPX|razón}}, donde en razón explicas los motivos claramente por los que no puede ser destacada.

Por favor explica brevemente porque estas a favor o en contra de la nominación de esa imagen, especialmente cuando votes en contra.

Puedes hacer comentarios en el idioma que quieras, aunque más vale tener en cuenta el hecho de que la mayor parte de los usuarios hablan inglés.

Reglas

Hay 9 días de deliberaciones. Se decide el resultado al día 10 después de la nominación.
Los usuarios anónimos pueden proponer candidatas.
Los usuarios anónimos pueden participar en la discusión.
Los votos de usuarios anónimos no cuentan.
Una nominación no cuenta automáticamente como un voto. Debes expresar tu apoyo de forma explícita.

La candidata se convertirá en una imagen destacada a condición de:

estar bajo una licencia libre (por supuesto)
que haya un mínimo de siete votos a favor
que la proporción de votos a favor / en contra sea al menos 2/1 (o sea, una mayoría de dos tercios o 67%)
si a partir del quinto día, la candidatura tiene al menos diez votos a favor y ninguno en contra, automáticamente será destacada (regla del quinto día)

Recarga para nuevas nominaciones: purge this page's cache

Propuestas

Featured picture candidates

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Dernekamp, Getreidefeld -- 2024 -- 0003.jpg

Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2025 at 15:57:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Germany
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 15:57, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 15:57, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red Arrows Formation Duxford Flying Finale 2024 02.jpg

Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2025 at 14:07:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Military jet aircraft
Info Red Arrows flying the Goose manouvere, with a relatively rare evening display at the Duxford Flying Finale providing nice light. C/u/n by me. — Julian H.^✈ 14:07, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Julian H.^✈ 14:07, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coral (Leptoria phrygia), Zanzíbar, Tanzania, 2024-06-01, DD 65.jpg

Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2025 at 12:27:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Anthozoa
Info Coral (Leptoria phrygia), Zanzibar, Tanzania. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 12:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 12:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rue des Anes Brules in St-Clair (1).jpg

Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2025 at 06:53:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 06:53, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 06:53, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the pre-rain light, it gives the scene a restful stillness. --Cart (talk) 13:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:26, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--XRay 💬 16:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Etang du Pla de la Font 06.jpg

Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2025 at 06:50:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Ariège
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 06:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 06:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Monasterio de El Escorial en Madrid.jpg

Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2025 at 03:50:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Spain
Info uploaded by Zvonimir Stamenov – nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 03:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 03:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Allegory Treaty of the Pyrenees - Giovanni Francesco Romanelli - Louvre, INV 20349.jpg

Voting period ends on 2 Mar 2025 at 20:15:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Painted ceilings
Info Giovanni Francesco Romanelli was an early 17th-century Italian painter, known for his use of bright colors and clarity of detail. Many of his works are exhibited in the Louvre. The Fresco depicted is one of these. Created, uploaded, nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:15, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Much better and more detailed than our present FP of this work. --Cart (talk) 20:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent photo. Also, per Cart, the present FP (uploaded by a banned user) should probably be delisted as it is unsharp, has obvious colour noise, and is barely QI. Cmao20 (talk) 00:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:27, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 16:05, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:La Palma - Cuervo Canario.jpg

Voting period ends on 2 Mar 2025 at 19:19:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Corvidae
Info all by imehling -- imehling (talk) 19:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Ok, this nomination is courageous ;-) -- imehling (talk) 19:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good for me. I've seen bird photos that are sharper at full size but the resolution is massive so there's plenty of room to downsize and create an image that's still large and very sharp. Good composition and nicely blurred background Cmao20 (talk) 00:02, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 13:22, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:24, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:BiBat QF 3469 QUINTAS Sorginaren Txabola kanpai formako ontzia.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2025 at 20:34:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Ceramics
Info created by Arabako Arkeologia Museoa – uploaded by Theklan – nominated by Theklan -- Theklan (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Theklan (talk) 20:34, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In my opinion the depth of field is too shallow. Even the center lacks sharpness at the top -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but per Basile Morin. The object is great and really interesting but the DoF is too shallow. I could support if it were only the far side that's out of focus but it's some of the near side too. Cmao20 (talk) 04:55, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile and Cmao20. In a studio shot like this with good light, you can be more generous with the DoF. --Cart (talk) 08:44, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gold dust day gecko (Phelsuma laticauda) Moorea.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2025 at 17:19:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Gekkonidae (Geckos)
Info High quality and high resolution photo of a relatively small (10-13cm in length) animal. created by Charlesjsharp – uploaded by Charlesjsharp – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice also the contrast of colors.--Harlock81 (talk) 19:54, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good! -Theklan (talk) 20:36, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very high level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:26, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Very~~ weak support The detail is impressive and the support is strictly for its educational value, but the composition is very lacking. With such bright colors on the animal and that varnished wood, it looks more like a kid's toy left on the dinner table. Some other background would be better. --Cart (talk) 08:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good point. As you know I always prefer naturual surroundings, but this is unusual. These geckos were introduced acccidentally many years ago from Madagascar and have adapted to live in houses for the wamrth. Apparantly, they are seldom seen outdoors. Thanks for the nom. Cmao20 Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for this info. In this case I think the surroundings add value to the photo because they illustrate the usual setting in which this gecko is found. Cmao20 (talk) 15:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suspected these geckos liked the indoors, and since that suspicion was only based on what I'd seen on TV, I was being cautious. But there are more appealing indoor backgrounds so I'll just tone it down to 'weak s'. --Cart (talk) 16:45, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 10:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Weak support~~ per Cart. – Aristeas (talk) 11:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Changed to full support because of the information that this species lives mostly indoors there – so the setting is appropriate. Thank you, Charles, for the explanation! – Aristeas (talk) 16:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose poor composition. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:34, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:08, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:25, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Panorama Tower at night ICM (60035).jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2025 at 13:00:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo_techniques/Styles and Techniques#Intentional camera_movement (ICM)
Info Panorama Tower at night (intentional camera movement). Created by Rhododendrites – uploaded by Rhododendrites – nominated by Zquid -- Zquid (talk) 13:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Zquid (talk) 13:00, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- I don't like the camera movement. Is not too much to know that this is an effect we want, so it just seems moved. -Theklan (talk) 20:37, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The effect works for me. I like all the luminous crosses created by the movement and find something artistic in the image. Also an original nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Basile Morin. It's a good example of this technique because the crosses are aesthetically pleasing. Cmao20 (talk) 04:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's a nice and well handled ICM, but since the movements are so precise and sort of follow the buildings' shapes, I think it needs some better perspective correction, otherwise you more get the impression that this was someone trying to take a photo during an earthquake with the buildings starting to fall. --Cart (talk) 09:17, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I was thinking the same thing when I saw this nomination. Will see if I can get to that later today. Thanks for the nom, Zquid. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 16:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile and Cmao20 (of course a little perspective correction, as suggested by Cart, could make the image even better). – Aristeas (talk) 16:32, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, for the diversity of opinions and tastes, I also support the suggestion of perspective correction. Why? Simply because in this type of image, lines and directions have a meaning. And if the image were tilted, the visual aspect would not be the same at all. I think that with these very straight buildings, properly worked horizontals and verticals will give more the impression that the blur is not the result of chance, but intentional in the context -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:01, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Theklan. I don't see the value to see this motion blur for a static subject. Ok for a car at the 24 Hours of Le Mans, not ok for a skyline by night. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 22:18, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not impressed by it, but it's just a matter of taste at this point. By the way, not to antagonize anyone, but applying perspective correction to this is just nonsensical, it's visually striking because each light traces out the same shape, perspective correction is for documentary purposes Henrysz (talk) 03:49, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Santamartamys, David Valle Martinez.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2025 at 12:55:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Science#Science
Info Scientific illustration of mammal Santamartamys, rodent rarely sighted. Illustration made with ocher stain for background, colored pencils and digital retouching. With the advice of Alistair Ian Spearing Ortiz scientific translator. This image was provided to Wikimedia Commons as a contribution from an art & design school thanks to a collaboration between EASD Pau Gargallo and Amical Wikimedia. (And Spectacular Mammal Rediscovered after 113 Years - First Ever Photographs Taken; Bogotá, 18 May 2011 / File:Red-crested Tree rat rediscovered after 113 years! (5731461919).jpg is one of the sources.)
Created by David Valle Martínez – uploaded by David Valle Martínez – nominated by Zquid -- Zquid (talk) 12:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think this is a "Science" picture more than just a nice picture of an animal (if you know what I mean)... so I choosed Scientific Art category... -- Zquid (talk) 12:55, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I would ask you to reconsider the gallery, since most of the images of animals in Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Animals are scientific art from old books on nature etc. (only 3 out of 28 are not). I think it would look odd to have just one animal image in the gallery that you suggest. --Cart (talk) 14:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It looks like the textured paper has been erased all around the illustration. But the lower left corner is dark with a white background -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:20, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Basile. The conversion from drawing to digital is done a bit haphazardly. This would be better as only a photo of the drawing. Mixing two media needs better post processing. --Cart (talk) 08:56, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree with both of you. Well, it would be very difficult to restore the paper texture, but it’s easy to remove the irritating remnants of the texture at the left border and in some other outer areas. This way we get at least a more consistent impression. Here is an attempt to retouch the image. I have also removed some tiny stains here and there which did not look like intentional parts of the drawing (of course it’s hard to say where to draw the line here; if you want to restore some little points or remove another stain just drop me a note). Furthermore, the missing sRGB colour profile has been added, as well as some basic metadata like author, title, short description, and copyright/license. @Basile Morin, Cart: Would you consider this retouched version as a considerable improvement? Then one could nominate it as an alternative … Hope it helps, – Aristeas (talk) 16:18, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aristeas, the transition in that picture looks better to me. However "one" should not add it, I think it's up to the nominator to decide if it should be entered as an 'Alternative'. You forgot to include Zquid in your question. I'm not a fan of the way people here sometimes just jumps in and tacks on 'Alts' to noms without even asking the nominator first, it's downright rude and disrespectful. Sometimes people want to keep things in their original state. We can suggest, that's all. --Cart (talk) 16:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Cart, I guess we have a misunderstanding here. I did not want to ignore Zquid. I just wanted to ask first the users who have commented on the image quality whether they would see an improvement in the retouched version. I did this because I do not want to bother the nominator with a suggestion to add an alternative version as long as I don’t know whether the people who made out the problems were satisfied with the improvements or not – in the latter case an alternative would make no sense at all. If you and Basile would have agreed with the retouching, I would have in turn asked Zquid whether they would consider to nominate the edited version as an alternative. I would never have added an alternative version myself (or asked you or someone else to do that; and if you look back you will see that I have never added an alternative to nominations by other people, but only suggested possible alternative versions). The “one could nominate it” was meant as a short explanation why I am asking you, and in no way intended as an insult to Zquid or as an insinuation that you should add the alternative. I understand that the wording of that sentence was unclear and unfortunate. I was under the impression that the use of the indirect “one” in such a context was an educated idiom in English, but it seems this was wrong (I may have confused this with German or classical Greek τις phrases). Please consider that my command of the English language, and also my skills in diplomacy, are not on your level. @Zquid: I apologize if my comment has insulted you. That was not my intention. I just wanted to help. – Aristeas (talk) 16:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Aristeas, I understand your good intention but I think a nominator should be included in all stages of a discussion about their nom. I reacted this way since I myself have been in Zquid's position, where someone was discussing how to correct my image instead of just asking me as nominator. It was not a good feeling and I did not wish it for Zquid. --Cart (talk) 17:06, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand, Cart. @Zquid: I apologize again, it was not my intention to ignore or insult you, I just wanted to avoid to bother you with suggestions as long as I did not even know whether they make any sense at all. But I see this was wrong. So my attempt to be polite was actually quite impolite. I am very sorry for that. I have striken my comment above. – Aristeas (talk) 17:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dias Gomes (sem data) - Restoration.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 17:31:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People
Info Unknown photographer – restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a shame it's so small, but of course it is irreplaceable and has tonnes of character. Cmao20 (talk) 17:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It is, at least, at a size where film grain probably is limiting the value of further zoom-in. Would prefer bigger, but the odd dimensions somewhat mitigate the narrow width, and it's rather amazing we have a free-licensed photo of him at all. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:28, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Clearly there is no point in having more pixels here. --PierreSelim (talk) 10:58, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Good job of restoration, but few pixels remain few pixels (or film grain). The fact that we only have one freely licensed photo does not automatically make it excellent. Moreover, a very tight crop on the left and right. - Je-str (talk) 18:28, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. -Theklan (talk) 20:37, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nick Ut speaks with the press (cropped).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 14:41:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info Nick Ut in 2016, created by David Hume Kennerly – uploaded by Opencooper – nominated by Poppytarts -- Poppytarts (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poppytarts (talk) 14:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm not sure about featuring this here on Commons, since the Terror of War is only in the public domain in the US, the rest of the world (that Commons services) might not agree. Perhaps it would be better to nominate this at WP:FPC on en-wiki where there are no such problems. --Cart (talk) 14:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Apart from that, I think that the left crop (the glasses and arm) is an problem for FP Poco a poco (talk) 20:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Comet Tsuchinshan–ATLAS, in the night sky over Tuntorp 3.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 14:04:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Comets
Info Comet C-2023 A3, Tsuchinshan–ATLAS, in the night sky over Tuntorp with the oil refinery at Brofjorden to the left, in Sweden. The trees were illuminated by streetlights below the hill and a waxing crescent moon rising, so everything was made in one shot, no composite. We already have an excellent FP of this comet, so this nom is a bit daring, but hear me out why I make it. Most photos of comets are made as closeups or in natural places with trees and rocks, and that makes it hard to appreciate just how big these comet tails are. All we subjectively see is that it's bigger than a rock or a tree. But if you add in a third big element of known size in the composition, our gullible brains can make the step-by-step connection and realize how gigantic these comets are. Here the layers are: trees, oil refinery and comet, and that makes it easier to understand the size. I also like how the wind was cooperating and made a "wooosh effect" on the clouds as the comet went by. ;-) All by me, -- Cart (talk) 14:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 14:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the light and the clouds, and I like the idea of putting a comet in its 'context' in the wider landscape. Cmao20 (talk) 17:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao20.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree exactly with Cmao20. It looks very realistic. Je-str (talk) 18:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:48, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful night sky scene, putting the comet in context. – Aristeas (talk) 11:03, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Paracel63 (talk) 13:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:53, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Estatuas-CatedralGualeguaychu.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 11:37:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Statues of Saint Catherine, Saint Anthony and Saint Lucy in the Cathedral of Gualeguaychú, Argentina

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures indoors
Info all by me-- Ezarateesteban 11:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 11:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry. Pretty statues but asymmetrical composition and not sharp enough IMO. Cmao20 (talk) 12:40, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Again I agree with Cmao20. I'm also not fond of the processing that makes the scene look very 2-dimensional, almost like a drawing rather than a photo of statues. --Cart (talk) 13:15, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I also agrre with W. carter. -Theklan (talk) 20:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. //SHB2000 (talk) 12:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Город мертвых.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 11:34:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Cemeteries#Russia
Info Crypt burial site in Dargavs created and uploaded by Tatiana Muzyka - nominated by FBilula (talk) 11:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- FBilula (talk) 11:34, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Good atmospheric photo and well composed but image quality barely scrapes over the bar. Cmao20 (talk) 12:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I so wanted to support this, because the place is very interesting and the composition is good, but the phone quality and lack of perspective correction, are too visible for me. --Cart (talk) 13:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Same opinion Poco a poco (talk) 20:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The framing and mood of the picture are nice. The quality of the phone picture is not good at full width (sometimes too much pixel is useless pixels). --PierreSelim (talk) 11:02, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose poor image quality. //SHB2000 (talk) 12:35, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Тихая2.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 11:35:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Russia
Info en:Franz Joseph Land, Hooker Island created and uploaded by Nixette - nominated by FBilula (talk) 11:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- FBilula (talk) 11:35, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, a photo from a very isolated archipelago Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bleak but interesting. The horizon is very slightly tilted, perhaps you could fix that. The file name does not comply with Commons naming policy, according to Google it means "Quiet2". If you could suggest a better name that describes the photo something like "Hydro-meteorological station facilities in Tikhaya Bay, Hooker Island", I can rename the photo and nomination, just let me know and I'll fix it. --Cart (talk) 13:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:05, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very interesting place, but very low quality. Both sides of the picture are too blurry. Not even a QI in my opinion, sorry. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 02:56, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Always happy to see detailed photos from some of the last truly remote places in this globalized world. Agree that the image quality deteriorates towards the left and right border, but IMHO we can be a bit more forgiving with drone shots, and even more when they come from such a secluded spot. – Aristeas (talk) 11:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support lovely drone shot! //SHB2000 (talk) 12:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Disagree on "very low quality". Quality is okay, quite good for a drone photo. Must have been taken under weather conditions rarely as good for this area. --A.Savin 16:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)^[reply]

Comment Maybe it's good for a drone photo (and very useful for sure), but not good enough to be FP. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 01:46, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:51, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kunyit Bubuk.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 10:03:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Spices
Info created & uploaded by Herusutimbul – nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 10:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Cmao20 (talk) 12:33, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

On second thoughts I agree with Cart and I think this was a hasty vote. Cmao20 (talk) 13:07, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sorry, but this does not work for me at all. The focus is very soft, there is strong CA to the left. The arrangement makes it look like some grotesque hand, add to that a strand of hair in the mix makes it unappetizing for me. I don't think we should promote descriptions of plants as having so many wonderful medical properties like "can also prevent and treat Alzheimer's", when none of that is proven (see the article about the plant). Might be best if the description focused on just the botanical facts. --Cart (talk) 13:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree, sharpness and DoF are not good, and the resolution is low. I expect more for a studio shot Poco a poco (talk) 20:41, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cart and Poco². //SHB2000 (talk) 12:36, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination} Tomer T (talk) 17:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Duplicaria dussumierii 01.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 09:15:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Terebridae
Info created by Llez – uploaded by Llez – nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:15, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 09:15, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of your best shell pictures. But please add the correct gallery Cmao20 (talk) 12:32, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao20. I would help out with the gallery, but I'm not sure I would get it right. ;-) --Cart (talk) 12:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Info Gallery added. Sorry --Llez (talk) 13:21, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 19:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:06, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:37, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Theklan (talk) 20:38, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 10:52, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Поглед на селото Горно Косоврасти 3.jpg (delist)

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 08:17:56

Info The left edge is longer and there's a thin line of missing pixels on the bottom as a result of the perspective correction, so the picture should be replaced with this cropped version. (Original nomination)
Delist and replace -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Uncontroversial improvement Cmao20 (talk) 12:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace Fine by me. Thank you for doing this correction the right way. --Cart (talk) 13:20, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace per nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Delist and replace per nomination. In such delist-and-replace nominations we used to show both the old and the new (replacement) image. AFAIK this is OK because FPCBot cannot handle delist-and-replace nominations anyway, so the additional image causes no harm here. Therefore I have taken the liberty to add the new (replacement) image above at the right. @W.carter: Is this still correct and is the additional image OK, or have I missed something? Thank you! – Aristeas (talk) 10:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for noting this. I wasn't aware about it as this is my first delist-and-replace request.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:16, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Aristeas, either way is ok since these noms are closed manually and we can ignore the Bot, and having both images is just more "user friendly". --Cart (talk) 13:33, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Kiril Simeonovski: No problem! I did not want to criticize you! I just wanted to add the new image for the sake of easy comparison, and wrote the notice mostly in order to discuss this with Cart. @Cart: Thank you! – Aristeas (talk) 16:00, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Restanten van een ruitjesbovist (Calvatia utriformis). 15-02-2025. (d.j.b). 01.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 05:59:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Lycoperdaceae
Info Remnants of a Calvatia utriformis Focus stack of 20 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think this could be FP but I am seeing all kinds of artefacts associated with flawed focus stacking and rough transitions between sharp and blurry areas in the background. So I think it needs more work. Cmao20 (talk) 12:26, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. New version. Thanks for your reviews. PS: the mushroom was lying in a rough carpet of fallen dead leaves. its natural environment. It may look a bit unkempt, but that's what I like in this case.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:27, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Good now! Thanks for your attention to the issues. Cmao20 (talk) 22:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:07, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There's a weird blurry area in the middle at the bottom -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support High level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:33, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Llez (talk) 10:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 11:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow, what a weird Halloween mushroom! – Aristeas (talk) 10:06, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --imehling (talk) 17:14, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:44, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Old Minneapolis Downtown Post Office on Mississippi River.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 01:53:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United States
Info created by Tony Webster on Flickr – uploaded by Domzalee – nominated by Myrealnamm -- Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 01:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 01:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I could point out some flaws - not sure perspective is completely right - but I really like the overall composition Cmao20 (talk) 12:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice view and good composition, I would very much like to support this if the perspective is corrected (see top row of windows). With such a geometric photo, the symmetry is important. It's easy to do so I'll wait for that. --Cart (talk) 13:25, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, the leaning horizontal line is irritating, I also find the noise level a bit high. The subject itself is not extraordinary in my eyes, either. Sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 20:46, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light and bland colors, sorry. Also per Poco. The subject is rather ordinary. About the composition, the asymmetrical composition (windows) and the cut out tree at the right don't work, in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:09, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In my eyes this view is actually interesting because of the contrast between the rigid order of the architecture and the living organic order of the trees. However to bring the contrast out we need, just as Cart has pointed out, a perspective correction. – Aristeas (talk) 10:03, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment from nominator: I could try to slightly fix the window asymmetrical issue by slightly cropping and rotating the image in a bit of time. Myrealnamm (💬Let's talk · 📜My work) 22:54, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bamberg klein Venedig-20200421-RM-160802.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 01:17:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Germany
Info I honestly don't know what you'll think to this. I can imagine getting 'low wow' opposes. But I really like this picture, I think it conveys a beautiful sense of this type of architecture and I love the placement of the boats in the frame, the panoramic crop, and the gentle, warm light. created by Ermell – uploaded by Ermell – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:17, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice light, high resolution, pleasant composition with the boat approaching, and exceptional architecture -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vulcan loves this photo and agreed with Basile Morin –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. —Bruce1ee^talk 07:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination Cmao20 --Ermell (talk) 10:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent, interesting and aesthetically pleasing. Makes me want to visit the place. --Cart (talk) 12:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 01:05, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 17:23, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Je-str (talk) 20:59, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support //SHB2000 (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--imehling (talk) 17:11, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:51, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beige and brown oil-paper umbrella on the edge of a wooden house in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Feb 2025 at 01:00:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing and Textiles
Info created – uploaded – nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This was also on my list! Cmao20 (talk) 01:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 09:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 10:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice muted colors and textures. --Cart (talk) 12:40, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:57, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Refined shot for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:43, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart. Subtle compositon. – Aristeas (talk) 17:22, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -Theklan (talk) 20:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --imehling (talk) 17:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:24, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cheomseongdae Observatory under blue sky in Gyeongju South Korea.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Feb 2025 at 23:16:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#South Korea
Info created – uploaded – nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I might have wished for more inspiring light but this is still good Cmao20 (talk) 01:12, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems a bit tilted to the left --Llez (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Llez: Thanks for your review. It's very easy to rotate this image, and I would be happy to improve it if necessary, however here I really don't think it's tilted. Otherwise the central observatory would lean to the right. Maybe the lampposts are not perfectly vertical (please compare to the pillars next to the second street lamp from the left, for example) -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support I think you are right. The baseline of the observatory is exactly horizontal. It is OK for me --Llez (talk) 10:19, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The tilt to the left comes from the fact that the camera orientation is not in line with the semi-minor axis of the ellipse-shaped fenced area. You should have moved a few steps to the right in order to take a balanced picture, but that would have resulted in a side view of the observatory which you probably wanted to avoid. In other words, the semi-minor axis of the fence is not perpendicular to the side of the square-shaped top of the observatory. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:09, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It makes sense. Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice compo Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 01:07, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:36, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 17:21, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 04:06, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:37, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pajara (Fuerteventura, Spain), Mirador Astronómico de Sicasumbre, Ausblick -- 2025 -- 7140.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Feb 2025 at 18:34:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain#Canary_Islands
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 18:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 18:34, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support A landscape with great 'texture' Cmao20 (talk) 19:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 19:59, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Feeling of vastness and fascinating layers -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:37, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Remembers me my own journey to exact this locality. --Llez (talk) 09:04, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The crop at the top right corner could have been more perfect. --Ermell (talk) 10:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:56, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:10, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Very nice forms here, the weak is because of the sharpness, not the best but overall FP to me Poco a poco (talk) 20:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Poco a poco. --Rbrechko (talk) 01:08, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:49, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Basile. – Aristeas (talk) 14:53, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:58, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Steinwälzer (Arenaria interpres) im Schlichtkleid am Strand von Oostkapelle 01.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Feb 2025 at 14:01:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus : Arenaria
Info created by Stephan Sprinz – uploaded by Stephan Sprinz – nominated by Stephan Sprinz -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 14:01, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 14:01, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 17:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nicely done Cmao20 (talk) 19:03, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --imehling (talk) 19:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice light but there are two dust spots at the left in the water. Is it normal saturation? -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:31, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:59, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Info I removed the dustspots, thanks for noticing. The saturation is due to the direct bright sunlight. --Stephan Sprinz (talk) 10:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:55, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 11:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:55, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 01:09, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 14:50, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:11, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Botete cara de perro (Arothron nigropunctatus), Anilao, Filipinas, 2023-08-25, DD 64.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2025 at 21:44:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Tetraodontidae_(Pufferfish)
Info Blackspotted puffer (Arothron nigropunctatus), Anilao, Philippines. Note: we have no FPs of this species in their habitat. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:44, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent photo Cmao20 (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sharp good quality, lead room, nicely isolated from all disturbing surroundings - what's not to like. --Cart (talk) 21:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:20, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:56, 18 February 2025 (UTC) — Sorry, double vote. --Cart (talk) 17:48, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --imehling (talk) 18:35, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Provided the WB is correct (as it seems a bit cold). Nice angle of view and very good quality for an underwater picture -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:23, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 09:08, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:10, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart. – Aristeas (talk) 14:46, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grand Rue de Pera, Constantinople LCCN2004672935 (cropped).jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2025 at 19:09:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1910-1919
Info A typical view of a street at the beginning of the 20th century... so what's interesting about it? Well... it's Constantinople (now Istanbul), the capital ot the Ottoman Empire, in 1912! The most interesting part are the french advertisements on the building in the background, particularly visible the Nestlé one. It's like just being there. /// Created by an Underwood & Underwood photographer in 1912 – uploaded originally by Fæ – cropped (was even a double stereo image) and nominated by LucaLindholm -- LucaLindholm (talk) 19:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- LucaLindholm (talk) 19:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Restoration is needed for FP, and it must be done from the TIFF file with less compression. Yann (talk) 19:31, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I know. The fact is that I still don't know how to restore an image. I saw that you various times did restore the historical images (I love them) nominated by me, often saving the nomination itself. I am so grateful for all this work done for me and other users. So, how do we proceed? Regards LucaLindholm (talk) 07:30, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Yann @W.carter, sorry, didn't remember to mention you. LucaLindholm (talk) 07:31, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You could either just let this nom run to its end (it will probably be closed as 'not featured' soon) or 'withdraw' it yourself. Then I suggest you start learning how to restore old images, if you have such a passion for them. When you nominate an image, you are responsible for it and how it looks. If you show up here time after time with images you know are not top notch, just hoping that someone else will do the job for you and save your nom, you are sure to bring down the displeasure of the community on yourself. We've recently had another user with this behavior banned from FPC for life, so patience around here is pretty thin right now. Anyone can browse old archives and find nice photos that needs restoring, the trick is to restore them yourself and by that contribute to improving the quality of the Commons collection. --Cart (talk) 10:53, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with Yann. Since you have made nominations of old photos before, you must know that such photos almost always needs to be restored before having a chance here. So please sort out such things before you make a nomination. When a photo arrives here, everything should be ready and top class, this is actually not a workshop. --Cart (talk) 19:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support "A typical view of a street at the beginning of the 20th century" is what is very interesting and educational. Much more interesting than photos of exceptional scenes. --Prototyperspective (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support

999

REAL 💬 ⬆ 02:50, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Adi Ness, Last Supper.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2025 at 17:30:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Sitting people
Info created by Adi Nes – uploaded by Andrew J.Kurbiko – nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Untitled, better known as The Last Supper, is a 1999 photo by Israeli photographer Adi Nes. Inspired by Leonardo da Vinci's famous late-15th century painting of the same name, the photo features 14 Israeli soldiers in a setting reminiscent of the Last Supper. Nes created The Last Supper to reflect the idea that death is ever-present in Israeli society, not only in combat but also in daily life. By portraying the soldiers as both Jesus and Judas Iscariot, Nes sought to emphasize the vulnerability and fragility of their lives. The photograph hints at the possibility that this meal could be the last for any of the soldiers. The photo was sold for $264,000 at Sotheby’s in 2012, the highest price paid for any Israeli photo. The original print is currently in the Israel Museum in Jerusalem. -- Tomer T (talk) 17:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting, but quality too low, and too small to be FP. Yann (talk) 18:17, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quality is on the low side but I think it can be FP for artistic and historic interest. Cmao20 (talk) 21:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Yann Poco a poco (talk) 20:53, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The idea and compo of making this image are great, and the quality is what you'd expect from a photo from that time, but the file size is too small especially for an image that is 1.3 m² (14 sq ft) (!) and available in a museum. --Cart (talk) 09:03, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose

999

REAL 💬 ⬆ 02:52, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Corona de espinas (Acanthaster mauritiensis), Zanzíbar, Tanzania, 2024-05-29, DD 50.jpg, featured

Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2025 at 08:07:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Asteroidea
Info Crown-of-thorns starfish (Acanthaster mauritiensis), Zanzibar, Tanzania. Note: we have no FP of this species, which name has in WORMS the status accepted. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:07, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's very tight, any chance of a bit more space around the creature? --Cart (talk) 10:40, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good for me, unusual creature and very sharp. I don't think more space would improve this picture. Cmao20 (talk) 15:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I've uploaded a new version with a bit more of crop overall keeping the square ratio, also adjusted the curves a bit, @W.carter, Cmao20, and Yann: . Btw, I personally didn't have the feeling that it was too tight, but ok. Poco a poco (talk) 21:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oh! Ok, thanks. But it was just me asking about a bit more space, the other voters were happy with it the way it were. I'm really happy with the change because I think it looks much better, and I'll vote for it. But if you preferred it with the original crop, you could just have waited for other opinions who might have agreed with you. --Cart (talk) 21:47, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks very nice now. :-) --Cart (talk) 21:48, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and fascinating creature -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:14, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:52, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart and Basile. – Aristeas (talk) 14:45, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:04, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:31, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals#Class_:_Asteroidea

File:Antigua (Fuerteventura, Spain), Museo de las Salinas del Carmen, Kristallisierungsbecken -- 2025 -- 7216.jpg, featured

Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2025 at 06:11:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Spain
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 06:11, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 06:11, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:33, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You are always good at finding patterns. I've been a bit hesitant with this because the lower right corner is bugging me, it takes the attention away from the rest of the photo. Might be better IMO if the lower part of the photo was cropped away (see note), but perhaps that's just me. --Cart (talk) 00:17, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks for your tip. I have tried it out and agree that it looks better. I have adjusted the format. --XRay 💬 16:30, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks great! --Cart (talk) 17:24, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:58, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:51, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:12, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:51, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 14:44, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Prototyperspective (talk) 13:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:30, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Spain

File:Trier, 09-12-2023 (actm.) 04.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Feb 2025 at 05:41:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Doors
Info Trier, Caspar-Olevian-Saal, Trier. Beautiful decorated entrance to the Caspar-Olevian-Saal.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:55, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting architecture Cmao20 (talk) 15:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 21:03, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light, nothing special here, and perspective correction is needed. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:28, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good, but the left side of the door is slightly tilted to the right.--imehling (talk) 18:32, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 04:49, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful Renaissance portal, well photographed. – Aristeas (talk) 14:42, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 18:13, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Viktor Yanukovych official portrait.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2025 at 22:15:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Zaporizhzhia State Regional Administration / Office of the President of Ukraine – uploaded by TEMPO156 – nominated by MasterRus21thCentury -- MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 22:15, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp, fake background -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:45, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Basile, not the top quality you'd expect from such a photo. --Cart (talk) 10:46, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This one is at least bigger than the other one but I'm not sure the extra size is really a benefit. It doesn't seem sharp and I feel it is probably upscaled. Cmao20 (talk) 15:20, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Basile Morin, @Cmao20, @W.carter Question But is there any way to correct the comments? This photo is quite suitable for the selected images - there is metadata and a large size. MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 19:18, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The size is fine but the sharpness/detail at full size is not. The picture does not look entirely sharp even in thumbnail, and at full size the lack of sharpness is very obvious. For comparison, look at the smudginess and lack of detail on Mr Yanukovych's tie in this picture compared to this FP where the texture of the fabric in Mr Ahlander's tie can clearly be discerned. And the FP of Mr Ahlander was promoted in 2012, standards have risen further since then. Cmao20 (talk) 19:22, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20 So it turns out that the problem lies in the tie? MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, I didn't say the problem was the tie. I said that comparing the tie to the other photo is a good way to illustrate how this photo is of low quality. None of the picture is at all sharp. Cmao20 (talk) 19:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, there is no way to fix this. Such a photo quality can't be made sharp and there is no way to "fix" cut-out background. The reviewers here on Commons are looking at the photographical and editing quality of the image. If you want the opinion of how good it illustrates the articles it's in, you need to nominate it at some Wikipedia instead, like Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates, but remember that rules and criteria varies a lot so read the rules carefully. --Cart (talk) 19:26, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral The image might have some flaws, like the ones mentioned above. --LucaLindholm (talk) 19:27, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Please LucaLindholm keep politics out of the FPC and strike those parts of your comments that deals with that. --Cart (talk) 19:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@W.carter Ok, ok. How can I strike the lines? Must I strike all the comment? -- LucaLindholm (talk) 19:32, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You remove the part of the comment that you want to strike and make an edit summary that you are removing politics from the nomination. This account has been on Commons since 5 June 2020, so hardly a new hacker account. --Cart (talk) 19:37, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@W.carter, done. LucaLindholm (talk) 19:41, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

To be fair, this user has also nominated a picture of Yushchenko, who is pro-EU and pro-NATO. So I don't think any specifically pro-Russian agenda is at play here. Cmao20 (talk) 19:35, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
@Cmao20 My Wikimedia Commons specializes in Russia and the CIS countries. Here, simple pragmatism wins out - post-Soviet politicians rarely have official portraits under a free license. MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 19:43, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that is understandable and fine. I do not suspect any ill intent on the creation of this nomination. However, the picture is of poor quality. Cmao20 (talk) 19:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile, quality is far below the FP-standards. --Milseburg (talk) 17:20, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 05:10, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Портрет 3-го президента України Віктора Ющенка.jpeg, not featured

Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2025 at 21:41:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Zaporizhzhia State Regional Administration / Office of the President of Ukraine – uploaded by Danilo Vasilinik 28 – nominated by MasterRus21thCentury -- MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 21:41, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MasterRus21thCentury (talk) 21:41, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Only 1,600 × 2,407 pixels, it's not very big. Probably downsized. No metadata. Arguable composition with this part of hand in the corner -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:39, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Small for such a photo, the crop is not optimal (hands, and small bits to the right), and the highlights on the flag-like image in the background are very distracting. Looks like he's about to be "beamed up". --Cart (talk) 10:52, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry. Good to illustrate him but JPEG artefacts, small size, and poor composition (hands + cropped shoulder). Cmao20 (talk) 15:19, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The technical quality is below the FP-standards. --Milseburg (talk) 17:22, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 05:09, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Zabytkowa cerkiew wpisana na listę UNESCO.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2025 at 20:17:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Poland
Info created and uploaded by Piter329c, nominated by Yann -- Yann (talk) 20:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Yann (talk) 20:17, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This has been on my list since I saw it at English Wikipedia but you got there first :-) Cmao20 (talk) 02:28, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Special architecture and interesting viewpoint. -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:36, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:54, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zquid (talk) 15:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 21:02, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:25, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, not a FP to me without a perspective correction, the church is also clearly leaning to the right Poco a poco (talk) 21:00, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile. – Aristeas (talk) 14:41, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco. --Milseburg (talk) 12:19, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Poco a poco and Milseburg: I made a correction, and proposed an alternative. Yann (talk) 13:06, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

Support Rotated version. Yann (talk) 13:06, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support This corrected photo is OK for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:25, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Definitely better after the tilt, but it does also need a perspective correction, --Poco a poco (talk) 22:01, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Andromeda Galaxy Hubble M31Mosaic 2025 42208x9870.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2025 at 13:16:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Galaxies
Info created by NASA/ESA/HST team (see below), uploaded by Koavf, nominated by Yann
Info The world's largest photo mosaic, made of photos from the Hubble Telescope.

It is a panoramic view of the neighboring Andromeda galaxy, located 2.5 million light-years away. It took over 10 years to make this vast and colorful portrait of the galaxy, requiring over 600 Hubble overlapping snapshots that were challenging to stitch together. The galaxy is so close to us, that in angular size it is six times the apparent diameter of the full Moon, and can be seen with the unaided eye. For Hubble's pinpoint view, that's a lot of celestial real estate to cover. This stunning, colorful mosaic captures the glow of 200 million stars. That's still a fraction of Andromeda's population. And the stars are spread across about 2.5 billion pixels. The detailed look at the resolved stars will help astronomers piece together the galaxy's past history that includes mergers with smaller satellite galaxies.

NASA, ESA, Benjamin F. Williams (UWashington), Zhuo Chen (UWashington), L. Clifton Johnson (Northwestern); Image Processing: Joseph DePasquale (STScI).

This is the complete version of File:Andromeda Galaxy M31 - Heic1502a Full resolution.jpg.

Support -- Yann (talk) 13:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 13:33, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the contour patterns. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 13:43, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Sebring12Hrs: Absolutely nothing can be done about that. Yann (talk) 17:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support This picture has great scientific and educational value. --imehling (talk) 18:20, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support But I'm the uploader, so maybe only give me 0.5 votes. Thanks, Y--I'm honored. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 18:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Just don't say no to this. -- KennyOMG (talk) 21:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 02:27, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:53, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 12:09, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zquid (talk) 15:34, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 18:14, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support One word from Vulcan: Astonishing –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:38, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:48, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Aristeas (talk) 14:37, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 12:38, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Prototyperspective (talk) 13:02, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Esther Bubley - An instructor of the Capitol Transit Company teaching a woman to operate a one-man streetcar.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Feb 2025 at 01:10:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1940-1949
Info created by Esther Bubley – restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:10, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:10, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:50, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 13:31, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 02:27, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:51, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Thi (talk) 19:38, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 07:12, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Perspective is not realistic. The scene is leaning. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 17:50, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:45, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I guess that the photo shows the sight a passenger would have got when entering the streetcar, hence IMHO the angle of view (upwards) and the leaning verticals are OK here. – Aristeas (talk) 14:19, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
My presumption is that part of the angle is also trying to make everyone visible. If you consider that as a goal, Bubley did incredibly well given how tight a streetcar is. It's not a movie set where you can remove walls. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:22, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I couldn’t agree more, Adam. – Aristeas (talk) 09:59, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Castle Square (22346p).jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Feb 2025 at 21:52:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Poland
Info Castle Square, Warsaw. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:52, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful colours and light, nice sky. – Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't mind the distortion when a photo is taken from high up, like here. It sort of suits the composition when it's encircling a square. --Cart (talk) 13:33, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --imehling (talk) 18:37, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very pretty and exemplary use of a square framing but there is a very pronounced distortion visible. Can you fix it? -- KennyOMG (talk) 21:16, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely light Cmao20 (talk) 21:28, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 22:06, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:50, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I would support, if the horizon wouldn't be so bulged. --Milseburg (talk) 17:16, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

+1 -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If anyone has a good technique for fixing a curved horizon (other than using the warp tool, which is a bit too destructive for a case like this IMO), I'd love to hear it, but I think the photo is worth a feature even still. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:12, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
It shouldn't be this curved in the first place. Could this be due to a faulty stitch? - Benh (talk) 16:49, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:43, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dark-eyed junco (21854).jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Feb 2025 at 14:01:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passerellidae_(New_world_sparrows)
Info Dark-eyed junco, slate-colored subspecies (Junco hyemalis hyemalis). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:01, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --imehling (talk) 18:34, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:27, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Interesting. I quite like the light and the background, but think the composition would work better if you remove the distracting branches at the left, and a tiny little bit at the right. You still have lead room. Image note added -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:49, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- @Basile Morin: New version uploaded, thanks. The crop above felt too tight on the left side, so I did a partial crop then cloned out the two little pieces of branches sticking out. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:11, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:36, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Vulcan supports this nomination, while also agreed with Basile Morin's note (can be considered to improve the nomination) –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support That did it. --Cart (talk) 20:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The plumage looks overprocessed to me, otherwise nice Poco a poco (talk) 21:03, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:39, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice. Thanks to Basile for his suggestions about the composition and thank you (Rhododendrites) for the new version. – Aristeas (talk) 14:14, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cesena - Rocca Vecchia - Mura adiacenti - 2024-09-25 22-19-00 001.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Feb 2025 at 08:22:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Italy
Info

“Nature comes to the rescue of every abandonment and, where everything is missing, it restores itself whole, flourishes and greens again on all the ruins: it has ivy for the stones and love for men. Deep generosity of the shadow.” Victor Hugo. This is a partial view of the architectural remains of Rocca Vecchia, Cesena (1294), although much of what is seen was refurbished and reinforced in the Renaissance period (14th century), and beyond... Created, uploaded, nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 08:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 08:22, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very beautiful golden-hour light and scenery. I would consider to crop it a little bit at the left because that small fragment of a wall at the left margin is too small to provide a framing effect and hence rather irritates. There are some little dust spots and unsharp insects in the sky, e.g. again near the left border and in the centre, which could be removed. And could you (sorry) remove/reduce the slight halo around the two cypresses and the round pillar at the right? Best, – Aristeas (talk) 10:38, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Agree... Terragio67 (talk) 10:47, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, the light is beautiful and the structure is interesting, but the composition is a bit lacking. The main subject is too small in frame, I would have liked to see more of down the wall and less heaven. If possible also an angle that was some degrees more and not make the wall "crenellations" so compact. It's a beautiful view that falls just short of FP for me. --Cart (talk) 13:25, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Cart's points on the composition but nonetheless FP to me because of great subject, light, and quality. Cmao20 (talk) 13:34, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Aristeas , @Cart , @Cmao20 Thank you very much, I made some changes based on your valuable comments and advice. At the moment I am satisfied with the result even if I am tempted to remove more from the left side. -- Terragio67 (talk) 14:12, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, it looks better, but unfortunately more wall and better angle can't be corrected so my vote still stands. --Cart (talk) 14:18, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your prompt response, I would need a drone for the proposed shot, however I was convinced to narrow the field of vision to give greater visibility to the monument. Terragio67 (talk) 14:46, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I suspected as much, that's why I wrote "If possible". Unfortunately not all scenes have an FP in them for all viewers, a fact that I'm painfully aware of. You do your best, but still it's not quite enough. That's when you learn to let go and enjoy the shots you can make. I always dread writing opposes like this, but compo is too important for me. --Cart (talk) 15:05, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank you very much for the improvements! FP for me. – Aristeas (talk) 14:26, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Less sky would be better in my view, but still good --imehling (talk) 16:39, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I agree with Cart, great lighting and quality, but the subject/compo is not talking to me, I see bricks but without a clear motif Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Your opinion, like Cart's, is important, and I accept it. I just want to point out that this composition is not dedicated exclusively to a monument, which unfortunately is abandoning us. The main actor is nature (the greenery) which takes possession of the bricks or what is left standing. The composition is to be divided into two parts: On the left the work of nature and on the right the work of men. This is why above I used a quote from Victor Hugo, an excellent observer and very attentive to nature. Terragio67 (talk) 19:56, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I understand what you are getting at, but in this case, the greenery just isn't as eye-catching as the man-made part which is stealing the whole show. --Cart (talk) 20:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:51, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:48, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support By others.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:10, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Црква „Св. Димитриј“ - Пареши 6.jpg

Voting period ends on 23 Feb 2025 at 23:13:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Others
Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:13, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:13, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know if others will find this to have sufficient wow, but it's FP to me. I like the simplicity of this shrine and the contrast between the plain stone and the colourful images Cmao20 (talk) 00:23, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:08, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The technical quality is there and the subject is interesting, but the lack of good light makes the whole thing look flat and bland. You made good use of what you had at that moment, but it doesn't reach up to FP for me. --Cart (talk) 13:33, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I concur, Poco a poco (talk) 18:42, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zquid (talk) 15:30, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Perhaps it would work with a better light, but currently the colors appear bland to me, and the white corner is not very appealing in my view. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red cherry leaves on branches in Tuntorp.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 Feb 2025 at 22:10:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Rosaceae
Info This photo actually belongs with the cherry blossom nom below, but not so much it works as a set. This is the same tree in autumn, and the view is from inside the tree looking out of the canopy, whereas the blossoms are photographed from the outside looking in. I like the almost graphic pattern the trunks make with the leaves and the sky, so very different from how it appears in the spring. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 22:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 22:10, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sensitive and interesting abstract Cmao20 (talk) 22:54, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:06, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Colourful leaves in autumn are always beautiful, but the trick is to find a representative detail and a suitable composition. That’s not that easy and here it has really succeeded. – Aristeas (talk) 10:47, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:38, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:50, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --imehling (talk) 18:56, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 18:29, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support Vulcan loves the colourful leaves and the mood of this photo –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:39, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tsemo Gompa - 2.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 Feb 2025 at 21:30:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#India
Info all by imehling -- imehling (talk) 21:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- imehling (talk) 21:30, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A splendid and interesting view, but the sharpness could be a little better. Cmao20 (talk) 22:53, 13 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support The excellent composition makes it FP for me --Kritzolina (talk) 09:59, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20. Very representative view of the castle. – Aristeas (talk) 10:55, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:32, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Agree, the sharpness is not there, otherweise nice, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 18:44, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Paracel63 (talk) 23:11, 15 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:43, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMO sharpness is good enough to print a poster, so OK. --Yann (talk) 11:52, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a nice view but for such a static scene, I'd like a bit more sharpness and detail. Even a two-photos panorama would have made it better. --Cart (talk) 13:40, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support By others.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:04, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:44, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]