Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 02 2025

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Crocus_chrysanthus_Prins_Claus_2023-03-17_1221.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Insect on Crocus flower in Poland (by Salicyna) --Gpkp 18:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Too small. Sorry. --Ermell 21:17, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  • The guidelines only say: Images should have at least 2 real megapixels of information. There is no minimum of file size. --PtrQs 02:53, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Resolution is fine but it's not sharp enough / lacking DoF and the bee's head is crushed black. --Plozessor 06:32, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 15:15, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

File:St._Ludwig_(Munich).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination St. Ludwig (Munich) --AuHaidhausen 09:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
    (Repeat my comment to your previous nomination of this image) Distorted due to perspective correction. Bad bottom crop. Do you have better version? --Екатерина Борисова 01:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
    I do not have any more photos, but we can also ask others, thank you.--AuHaidhausen 14:57, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose PC/tilt is needed. --Sebring12Hrs 13:45, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The perspective corresponds to the natural feeling and in my opinion does not need to be corrected. But the light comes from the wrong side and therefore the photo is not a QI for me. -- Spurzem 17:20, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
I disagree, the building is falling backward with this perspective, what is natural with that ? --Sebring12Hrs 19:31, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:52, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Bombus_terrestris_2018-09-12_0020.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Buff-tailed bumblebee in Poland (by Salicyna) --Gpkp 18:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Lvova 19:34, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not big enough. Sorry. --Ermell 21:18, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Resolution is borderline but it's also too dark (crushed shadows) and lacking DoF. --Plozessor 16:16, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose A bit too small. --Sebring12Hrs 23:45, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
    •  Comment the guidelines only say: Images should have at least 2 real megapixels of information. There is no minimum for file size. --PtrQs 02:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose too small DoF. --PtrQs 02:49, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 15:16, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Paris_8e_-_Église_de_la_Madeleine_-_Statue_du_Christ_Sauveur_(Francisque_Duret).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Paris 8e - Église de la Madeleine - Statue du Christ Sauveur (Francisque Duret) (by Romainbehar) --Sebring12Hrs 00:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Scotch Mist 07:47, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Tilted and needs (further) noise reduction before it can be promoted IMO. --Benjism89 16:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment @Benjism89: Please do not reset anything with a vote to "Nomination" unless the vote is invalid. You might (temporarily) oppose instead and set to "Discuss". Reset to "Promotion" because I do not wish to oppose either. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 23:01, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Sorry. This picture is very good, but I'm temporarily voting  Oppose because I think the two issues I raised (tilt and high noise) need to be adressed. --~~~~
  •  Comment Alright, but could you please correct the signature? --Robert Flogaus-Faust 11:03, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Sorry about my invalid signature, I didn't have access to a computer for the past few days and editing this page on a mobile phone is challenging ... --Benjism89 13:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Invalid vote lacking a signature was stricken. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:42, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good (now). --Plozessor 16:18, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose Voting again because my first vote was invalid. This picture is really good, but there are two easily fixable issues : tilt (the lines in the background are vertical on the left but leaning on the right : I don't think PC is needed for this picture but verticals should be leaning symetrically on both sides) and noise in the background (visible even at 598x1024px). --Benjism89 13:30, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:53, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Бывший_песчаный_карьер_в_Павлово.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Lake, Pavlovo, Kirovsky district (by Olga1969) --FBilula 13:10, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Lots of CAs at the edges, but that could be fixable. --AVDLCZ 20:10, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Why is this here without a vote? Anyway,  Oppose due CA per AVDLCZ. --Plozessor 08:02, 28 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose CA in the corners --PtrQs 01:19, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 15:18, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Placa_Huellas_de_Alex_A74275820241123.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Alex's Footprints Plate. --Rjcastillo 01:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 02:16, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It is not enough to make and upload an image. Per COM:QIC, for this picture to be valuable for use in Wikimedia and other projects, this image must have an accurate description on the file page of what it is. It should state that these are hand and feet imprints of notable footballers? Whose imprints are they? – please provide the popular name/formal name of the footballer. Where are they found? - Calçada da Fama do Maracanã (Maracanã Walk of Fame) at the Jornalista Mário Filho Stadium in Maracanã, Brazil? Also, is posting an image of these imprints permissible under the copyright laws of Brazil? --GRDN711 18:54, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Legends and descriptions corrected. --Rjcastillo 22:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support now with changes. --GRDN711 19:00, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support This one is ok. --Plozessor 16:23, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The top is blurred. --Sebring12Hrs 13:39, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:55, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Placa_Huellas_de_Leônidas_A74275620241123.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Footprints of Leônidas Plate. --Rjcastillo 01:47, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 02:16, 26 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per COM:QIC this image needs a complete and accurate description on the file page. The issue of copyright should also be addressed. --GRDN711 18:55, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Legends and descriptions corrected. --Rjcastillo 22:36, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support now with changes. For an image uploaded to Commons with the intention that it find utility at other sites (rather than collecting digital dust); it must be well described and categorized per COM:QIC so it can be searched and found. --GRDN711 18:54, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now because of the perspective. Should IMO be rotated so that the text is horizontal. --Plozessor 16:26, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose the only part in focus is the name tag, but not the Footprints --PtrQs 01:12, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per PtrQs, not in focus enough. --Sebring12Hrs 13:38, 30 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 23:11, 1 January 2025 (UTC)

File:Karaköy_desde_el_puente_de_Gálata,_Estambul,_Turquía,_2024-09-28,_DD_93.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Karaköy from the Galata Bridge, Istanbul, Turkey --Poco a poco 04:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Too much/not enough bridge, too much sky. Overall bad crop. --Kallerna 19:21, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  • Poor judgement. Adding the fishing rods (and therefore some sky) was intentional and a valid composition. Yours is no reason to decline a picture for QI. --Poco a poco 21:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO it's a valid composition, using the bridge as kind of frame. However, this should be somehow mentioned in the description. Now it just says "Karaköy from the Galata Bridge", the bridge and fishermen are not mentioned at all. --Plozessor 06:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. --Rjcastillo 23:22, 27 December 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support unusual composition but OK for me. The only thing I do not like is the cutted ship at the very left. --Tuxyso 11:43, 29 December 2024 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 15:19, 1 January 2025 (UTC)