Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 10 2019

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Gedenkstein_Jüdischer_Friedhof_Soest_IMGP1610_smial_wp.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Gedenkstein am Eingang des Jüdischen Friedhofs in Soest (Westfalen). --Smial 12:33, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose I think the top crop is too tight. Also, I think WB is off --Podzemnik 05:29, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I disagree. The crop is intended both at the top and at the bottom and nothing is cut off. And what indication let you assume that something would be wrong with the white balance? --Smial 07:37, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  • @Smial I can't help it to see the stones as part of the composition and the crop seems very tight up there. The image looks pinkish to me. I might be easily wrong so let's see what other users think :) Regards, --Podzemnik 09:13, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 07:25, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Fulica_atra.001_-_London.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination Fulica atra (Eurasian Coot) in 2008 in Hyde Park, Londres. --Drow male 06:34, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support I love the composition, but it might have been a bit sharper --Michielverbeek 07:12, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Sorry. CAs at the head. Sharpness must be better. The crop at the top is too close. --XRay 07:15, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not very sharp, lots of CA, some chroma noise.--Peulle 09:44, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek 23:13, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 07:22, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

File:A_roast_lamb_Sunday_dinner_at_The_Black_Bull,_Fyfield,_Essex,_England.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Sunday roast lamb. --Acabashi 13:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Piotr Bart 13:48, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I really have no idea about these motives. I find the sauce spilled over on the edge of the plate disturbing. I would like to hear other opinions, whether that should have been better arranged. --Milseburg 19:04, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  mild support Yes, I think that your point means that it would not succeed as an FP. For QI, I think the main point is whether the photo has been well taken, rather than the appeal and arrangement of the subject. Since the DoF is good here, I'll support - even though the lighting could have been done better.--Peulle 09:13, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Peulle. --Smial 10:03, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Comment I think that a better arrangement of the motive in such cases is easily possible and is the responsibility of the photographer, not just the technical things. --Milseburg 11:36, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I don't think your view is unreasonable, but I think this particular shot is acceptable.--Peulle 18:49, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Several food photographs with direct flash, ugly reflections and lots of other faults have been promoted here recently. This image is by far on the less ugly side. --Smial 13:26, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't like the composition. It rather looks like a feeding trough, the motif could have been arranged properly. --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 11:59, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

File:CerritoLibertadorSanMartin-juegos.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Game zone in Cerro Libertador General San Martín, Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 19:12, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Question What is this ? Does not look normal IMO. please see notes --Eatcha 19:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  • It's a single shot, only edited to fix tone curves, it's processed from RAW, I think is normal Ezarate 19:37, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Thanks for your swift reply, Good quality. --Eatcha 20:16, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unsharp --Podzemnik 22:32, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Podzemnik. -- Ikan Kekek 07:06, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Yes, neither the tree nor the swings are sharp.--Peulle 11:47, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. --Aristeas 09:25, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 12:00, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Hôtel_de_ville_de_Béziers007.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination City hall of Béziers, Hérault, France. --Tournasol7 21:38, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose A sharp photo and the perspective is well done, but it was not the right moment to take this photo. For me too many disturbing walking people for a QI --Michielverbeek 22:37, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I disagree. The walking people are a part this photo. --Tournasol7 05:51, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support - OK, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 07:32, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I can go along with all the people except the one on the far left ... she's cut in half.--Peulle 11:45, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan. --Smial 12:45, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Michielverbeek.--Fischer.H 17:23, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The big white man is very disturbing for me. -- Spurzem 19:45, 5 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Agree with Spurzem. The difference between a snapshot and a decent picture can be a matter of waiting a few seconds, and there's no excuse for not doing so. Rodhullandemu 23:42, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 06:41, 9 May 2019 (UTC)

File:Gauja_River.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Gauja National park --Papuass 09:20, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support - I would call this good quality, but some people might object to the contrast between the very dark trees in the lower left and the very bright light in much of the rest of the picture. However, I think the haze and sun rays are a good effect. -- Ikan Kekek 09:45, 3 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Question - Why is this in CR? -- Ikan Kekek 07:36, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support - I do not understand either why this is here. Anyway I support the promotion. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 09:26, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
Maybe a result of vandalism yesterday evening.--Milseburg 10:31, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for me no QI.--Fischer.H 13:25, 4 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Good one. --Smial 14:36, 6 May 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan. --Aristeas 09:19, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 12:01, 9 May 2019 (UTC)