Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives March 06 2015

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Poertschach Werzer-Bad 01032015 0220.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Werzer bath establishment, Poertschach, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 17:38, 01 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support QI -- Spurzem 20:09, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
    Not so fast. There is a problem with a magenta CA on the left (see the note). Please first fix that, before the promotion. --Halavar 21:04, 1 March 2015 (UTC) ✓ Done Thank you for your review. Reworked version uploaded. --Johann Jaritz 02:36, 02 March 2015 (UTC)
     Support Good now. --Halavar 23:45, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --Hubertl 10:09, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 21:49, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 09:27, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Hamamelis x intermedia 'Angelly'. Locatie, Tuinreservaat Jonkervallei.jpg

[edit]

File:Poma 2000 Hôtel de Ville.jpg

[edit]

File:St Casimir Church Exterior At Dusk, Vilnius, Lithuania - Diliff.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Saint Casimir Church in Vilnius, Lithuania. (by Diliff) --Pofka 13:08, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment The ghosts behind the red car don't disturb me, but a little bit denoising of the sky would be fine. --Code 08:50, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support seems ok to me. Mattbuck 22:38, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Question @Mattbuck: Why do you think that the usual habits do not apply here? --Code 13:07, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  • I interpreted your comment as a suggestion of improvement, not of "this is not yet QI". Mattbuck 22:05, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Neutral Not opposing any longer. Doesn't seem as if anybody was interested in improving the quality of this picture. --Code 07:50, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --Christian Ferrer 07:58, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 10:58, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support OK to me. --Johann Jaritz 03:59, 03 March 2015 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 09:25, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Locatie, Natuurterrein De Famberhorst. (Alnus). Elzentak met katjes boven bevroren poel 02.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Location: The Natuurterrein Famberhorst. (Alnus). Elzentak with kittens above frozen lake.
    Famberhorst 05:46, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline  Support Nice, good quality. --Johann Jaritz 07:43, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
     Oppose Sorry, but it is too noisy for me and somehow unclear. --Hockei 18:09, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
     Oppose per Hockei --MB-one 17:51, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --C messier 09:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

File:2015_Wieża_widokowa_na_Borówkowej_01.jpg

[edit]

✓ Done--Jacek Halicki 19:44, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
 Comment Sorry for being pedantic here, but it's not done. Roof is still sliding backwards, there are still two different perspectives in one image. Details here. --El Grafo 10:53, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --Hubertl 22:01, 26 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose see El Grafo --Dirtsc 11:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Übertriebene Korrektur der Perspektive. -- Spurzem 13:04, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me --Halavar 18:34, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support --Livioandronico2013 21:52, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

File:2015_Wieża_widokowa_na_Borówkowej_02.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Lookout tower on Borówkowa 2 --Jacek Halicki 09:37, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Hubertl 09:46, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Perspective overcorrection, see FPC nomination for details --El Grafo 16:59, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

✓ Done--Jacek Halicki 19:54, 26 February 2015 (UTC)

 Comment Sorry for being pedantic here, but it's not done. Roof is still sliding backwards, there are still two different perspectives in one image. Details here. --El Grafo 10:53, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose see El Grafo --Dirtsc 11:26, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose. Schade, aber das Dach wirkt hier wie bei den folgenden Bildern unnatürlich oder unwirklich. -- Spurzem 13:06, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --C messier 09:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Uro_boy.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Boy from the Uro Islands, Peru. -- Christopher Crouzet 12:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Nice portrait and composition, sharp face - QI for me; just a question: What about personality rights warning for this boy? -- Achim Raschka 14:27, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose due to overexposure on the jumper, I'd also say the image seems a bit blue. --Mattbuck 16:47, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Nice scene but overexposed --Kreuzschnabel 07:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose overexposed --PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 10:52, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support Good image and suitable exposure, otherwise his face would be too dark --Shansov.net 14:07, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
    •  Comment IBTD. In a quality image, contrast should be dealt with skilfully instead of overexposing most of the pic IMHO. There are several ways of brightening a shady face. --Kreuzschnabel 09:06, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support Good image and propper exposure--Tobias "ToMar" Maier 05:31, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support GQ for me. --Palauenc05 17:14, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support. There are clipping areas, but in this case not disturbing, as colors are not really distorted and look natural. -- Smial 10:44, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support To me this looks like one of those days where the sun is so unforgivingly harsh and bright your eyes seem to hurt if you don't wear sunglasses. Hence, exposing to the bright side a bit actually makes sense to me. --El Grafo 15:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

File:London MMB »065 River Thames.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination: River Thames. Mattbuck 21:00, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. River Thames? The background is blurrisch, only on part is a kind of acceptable sharp. --Hubertl 10:29, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment Other opinions? --Mattbuck 22:34, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support yes, I see nothing blurred nor unsharp, just a little acceptable noise --Christian Ferrer 20:56, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Kreuzschnabel 06:30, 4 March 2015 (UTC)

File:Jason_Evans_WiR_at_Llyfrgell_Genedlaethol_National_Library_of_Wales_03.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination: Dr Dafydd Tudur receiving National Library of Wales at Aberystwyth. By User:Llywelyn2000 --Chase me ladies, I'm the Cavalry 17:01, 12 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose The portrait is not perfectly sharp, however I think it can pass to QI after applying perspective correction for the background building. --Cccefalon 09:41, 14 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Weak support I'm not sure that's necessary or even desirable. I think the perspective forms part of the composition.Mattbuck 22:50, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment Some CA and some color noise in the jacket, perhaps even moirée. I would like to see some more votes, so send to CR instead of decline. -- Smial 14:42, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Comment I absolutely agree Mattbuck. Perspective correction neither necessary nor wanted. DerFussi 07:15, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The handling of the moirée is to disturbing.--Tobias "ToMar" Maier 03:30, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?

File:Heuliez GX 327 n°746 Réseau Mistral Mourillon.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Bus in Toulon --Billy69150 12:38, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Zcebeci 15:07, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
     Comment I disagree, its tilted clockwise. Please repair. --Hubertl 18:24, 18 February 2015 (UTC) *
  • ✓ Done --Billy69150 21:14, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support good Quality now.--Hubertl 07:28, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Some colours seem quite dull to me, and I don't really like the contrast (white-blue sky vs darker sections). --TwoWings 15:52, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
  • weak  Oppose bad light : disturbing shadow --Christian Ferrer 20:48, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Weak support, but Billy69150, this needs a tighter crop at the top. Mattbuck 22:11, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Christian Ferrer --El Grafo 17:18, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support This shadow does not seem me disturbing and I find the photo very nice. Kvardek du 19:29, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Support good quality--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 11:48, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
  •  Weak support, as Mattbuck - DerFussi 07:07, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 09:24, 5 March 2015 (UTC)