Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 20 2021

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Himmelberg_Turracher_Straße_9_Schiffer_Haus_1825_erbaut_24092021_9021.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Schiffer house from the year 1825 on Turracher Straße #9, Himmelberg, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:51, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Knopik-som 03:23, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I am guessing the house in question is at the back but there is clutter all around, including telephone lines. The best option would have been to move to a better angle. Unfortunately IMHO not QI. --GRDN711 02:35, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment I have no problem with the telephone lines, but what is the shadow near the upper right? -- Ikan Kekek 07:25, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not the best framing or image quality. Alvesgaspar 08:24, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Good image quality, so far it is QI, but the description is very bad. Which of the depicted houses is the Schiffer Haus? The description should be considerably more detailed. --Smial 12:10, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done @Smial: Thanks for your review. The file description was being improved. See also annotation. —- Johann Jaritz 07:38, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  conditioned support To improve the file description --Moroder 20:26, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done @Ikan Kekek: Thanks for your reviews. Some improvements were done. —- Johann Jaritz 06:22, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done @Moroder: Thanks for your review. The file description was being improved. —- Johann Jaritz 07:36, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support That mild a shadow doesn't bother me. -- Ikan Kekek 08:51, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good. --Aristeas 09:37, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 06:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)

File:Franzenheim_Wegekreuz_26647-2.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination: Wayside cross (1925) near Franzenheim, Germany. --Palauenc05 10:35, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Review
     Oppose Sorry: The object is too small, disturbing tree trunk in the foreground. --F. Riedelio 14:38, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
 Comment I don't understand what the cut tree has to do with the object (wayside cross). --F. Riedelio 06:01, 9 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Comment Other opinions, please, esp. about the "disturbing tree". --Palauenc05 15:51, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per F. Riedelio. Moving in closer would resulted in a better image the wayside cross. --GRDN711 12:46, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
    •  Comment @ GRDN711: Look at the file description, the motif is the surroundings of the cross. A closer look is included there in a second picture. --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:28, 10 October 2021 (UTC)
    •  Comment @Palauenc05: Thank you for pointing that out. I was going off the nomination description and did not see the other image. Unfortunately, I still don't like this image per Jebulon. I just want to chop down the tree to start... --GRDN711 02:16, 14 October 2021 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support. I don't like the nearly white sky, and I would have done the composition differently. The tree is basically ok, but I'd have put it near to the right image margin, not as prominent. But this is only a matter of taste, from a technical point of view, the photo is very good. --Smial 11:37, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't like the composition, which is part of the quality. The surroundings of the subject are disturbing (iron fence wires, trunk, grey sky, cropped road etc...) Could have been acceptable with another point of view maybe. Yes, matter of taste.--Jebulon 15:13, 11 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support For me is ok --Commonists 20:14, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support I also find this photo good enough. -- Ikan Kekek 08:53, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Ikan. Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 03:17, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per other opposers Alvesgaspar 23:45, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 06:49, 19 October 2021 (UTC)