Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 22 2020

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Rutger_Termohlen,_Collin_van_der_Sluijs_&_Super_A_-_De_rat_2.png

[edit]

  • Nomination A mural depicting a large rat with several people with bird heads dancing around it --ReneeWrites 22:16, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment It is hanging a bit to the left --Michielverbeek 05:17, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Not sure what you're referring to, all the verticals are straight as an arrow: https://imgur.com/a/NV93qjJ --ReneeWrites 19:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I have added two notes. Left vertical is hanging a bit to the left (it looks like a hockey stick) and the right vertical is hanging a little bit to the right. If you don't agree, please change the nomination in discuss for more opinions. Btw, it is repairable --Michielverbeek 05:20, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Little tilt is no problem for me. --Augustgeyler (talk) 09:10, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Not a big deal for me either. It fits perfectly within the frame. --Vincent60030 10:37, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Sorry, I realize I have been too severe and have trusted too much to my first impression. --Michielverbeek 03:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   -Michielverbeek 03:57, 20 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Grillige_boomstronk._Locatie,_Stuttebosch_in_de_lendevallei._27-08-2020._(actm.)_01.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Whimsical tree stump. Location, Stuttebosch in the lime valley. Friesland province.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:41, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:52, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It is difficult to separate the stump in the image from the background. --Kirill Borisenko 01:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support Indeed the stump should be better separated from the background. Maybe it can still be done with image editing afterwards.-- Spurzem 06:38, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose with Kirill. It's really hard to separate the main object from its background --Augustgeyler (talk) 10:34, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support OK 4 me. --Palauenc05 21:06, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. --Fischer.H 17:13, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done. New version. Thanks for your reviews.--Agnes Monkelbaan 17:31, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek 23:17, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality --Tagooty 13:45, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Vincent60030 14:58, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

File:2014_Powiat_wodzisławski,_Buków,_Kaplica_Matki_Boskiej_Różańcowej_01.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Our Lady of the Sorrow chapel. Buków, Silesian Voivodeship, Poland. --Halavar 09:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Moroder 12:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. There is a lack of sharpness. --Augustgeyler 10:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. For me the sharpness is sufficent for QI. --Armenak Margarian 14:35, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose With a camera like that I may have to agree with Augustgeyler. --Vincent60030 10:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Lacking sharpness, sky noisy. --Tagooty 13:47, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Vincent60030 10:40, 19 September 2020 (UTC)

File:2014_Rybnik,_Zabytkowa_Kopalnia_Ignacy_07.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination The Kościuszko shaft hoisting tower. „Ignacy” Historic Mine. Rybnik, Silesian Voivodeship, Poland. --Halavar 09:55, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Moroder 12:11, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree due to distortion and lack of sharpness --Augustgeyler 10:50, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good for me. I see no disturbing distortion. -- Spurzem 14:38, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I checked it again, and I am sorry but there is a strong distortion. --Augustgeyler 10:07, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support It is sufficient for a QI considering its structure. --Vincent60030 10:41, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Vincent60030 10:46, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Dülmen,_Bahnhof,_abgerissenes_Empfangsgebäude_--_2020_--_171401.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination: Demolished reception building of the Dülmen train station, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 03:53, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:01, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Mostly unsharp and lack of details. Sorry. --Mosbatho 18:44, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Jaritz --Moroder 23:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Neutral good composition but detail is missing--Augustgeyler 10:33, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose not sharp. --Vincent60030 10:57, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Vincent60030 10:47, 21 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Cortile_interno_ingresso_trifora_Castello_di_Stenico.jpg

[edit]

  • I don't think so; the angles are the same on the wall in the background as well, and I can see the stretching in the image as you go upwards towards the corner.--Peulle 11:22, 16 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Vincent60030 08:03, 13 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]