Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 17 2024

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Leuchtturm_Pagensand_Süd_mit_Sockel_(2).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Der kleine Leuchtturm Pagensand Süd mit Sockel im Museumshafen Övelgönne. By User:Pauli-Pirat --Nightflyer 19:43, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment Needs perspective correction, otherwise good. --ReneeWrites 22:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Greetings --Nightflyer 07:43, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --ReneeWrites 20:17, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The image is pixelated, shows compression artifacts at contrasty parts and has a low level of detail. --Augustgeyler 20:36, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Augustgeyler, plus looking really unnatural due perspective. Might be better without PC (for Commons:Quality_images#Perspective). --Plozessor 08:27, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --August (talk) 11:19, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

File:Weisse_Mauer,_Oberursel_(IMG_20221105_165849-Pano).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination View from Weiße Mauer towards Großer Feldberg (left) and Kolbenberg (right), Oberursel (Taunus) --MB-one 08:34, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment Rather noisy. The right and left edges are strange. --Milseburg 13:21, 3 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No response --Milseburg 16:10, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Thanks for the review --MB-one 17:07, 10 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Intense CR in the left third (twigs above the horizon). IMHO not easy to fix. White balance in the sky seems off. --Zinnmann 09:26, 11 July 2024 (UTC) Also seam at the bottom to fix. --Milseburg 13:48, 11 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Info Switching to Consensual review since there is an oppose involved. --Augustgeyler 08:28, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry ... CA in the branches, partly blurry, unnatural colors, tilted. --Plozessor 08:30, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 12:37, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

File:Alexandr_Makedonsky,_Summer_Garden.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Bust of Alexander the Great, Summer Garden, Saint-Petersburg --Lvova 14:31, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Very nice but unfortunately too soft. --Augustgeyler 16:17, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Disagree, let's discuss it. --ReneeWrites 22:29, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry but I agree, the face is to soft with low level of details imo.--ArildV 06:53, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Neutral Undecided, DoF is borderline. --Plozessor 10:02, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others, not enough details for a QI taken outside in good lighting conditions. --Benjism89 11:50, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 12:36, 16 July 2024 (UTC)

File:Emirates,_ILA_2024,_Schoenefeld_(ILA43985).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Entrance booth to the Emirates static display area at ILA Berlin Air Show 2024 --MB-one 08:36, 28 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Right side leaning in a bit. IMHO top crop is acceptable. --C messier 22:26, 6 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose People clearly recognizable --Georgfotoart 10:36, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment That's not relevant for QI. Plus, the photograph was created with an official permission by the organizers of ILA. --MB-one 22:08, 7 July 2024 (UTC)
  • People at public events in Germany may be recognizable on pictures as long as they're not the primary subject. But  Oppose until perspective is fixed. --Plozessor 16:14, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
  • OK, but the image section is still unfavorable  Oppose --Georgfotoart 20:49, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Info only one vote per reviewer! --Augustgeyler 16:41, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
  • @C messier and Plozessor: ✓ Done Thanks for your reviews. Have applied perspective correction. --MB-one 18:32, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support now! --Plozessor 05:54, 13 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. ReneeWrites 23:12, 12 July 2024 (UTC)
  •  Neutral Technically OK. The sharpness is low but good enough. The composition is not good, showing only parts of the that tail fin, people are relatively unsharp at the outer parts while at the image centre nothing is happening and the empty foreground takes very much room. --Augustgeyler 16:26, 14 July 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 23:07, 16 July 2024 (UTC)