Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 24 2020

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

Consensual review[edit]

==[edit]

  • Nomination Statue of Sholom Aleichem in Kyiv. By User:Dmitri Semenovsky --Andrew J.Kurbiko 08:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose no good lighting conditions, too hard contrast, too dark shadows --Augustgeyler 09:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. harsh light, but main object is very sharp. Good QI IMO --George Chernilevsky 10:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me. --Milseburg 13:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support For me, too. --Palauenc05 17:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Per George, it is impossible to avoid the harsh light in this situation --Michielverbeek 05:01, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Spurzem 11:27, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Vincent60030 05:47, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

==[edit]

  • Nomination Statue of Sholom Aleichem in Kyiv. By User:Dmitri Semenovsky --Andrew J.Kurbiko 08:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose no good lighting conditions, too hard contrast, too dark shadows, not sharp on the lower hand --Augustgeyler 09:41, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. harsh light, but main object is very sharp. Good QI IMO --George Chernilevsky 10:28, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me. --Milseburg 13:40, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support For me, too. --Palauenc05 17:14, 22 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Per George, it is impossible to avoid the harsh light in this situation --Michielverbeek 05:03, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I like this light. -- Spurzem 11:25, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Vincent60030 05:47, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

File:AntoninoReyes.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Antonino Reyes, military of Argentina. --Ezarate 18:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Not the work of a Commoner --Poco a poco 20:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
    Sorry, I did the scanning job --Ezarate 21:08, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Does it mean according to argentinian law that you do have the rights of the image? or don't you get those rights by scanning? sorry, I'm not an expert in that field and it isn't a QI to me as long as it can be proven that you do have the rights of the image after the scanning, only then it would be the work of a Commoner --Poco a poco 12:02, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Ch Decaux is the author, he died more than 70 years, so it is in PD Ezarate 20:09, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
Esteban, that's precisely the point. If you say that you assume that you have no rights on the image and the original rights or Ch Decaux apply. Saying that you disqualify this images as QI candidate because you've no rights on it. --Poco a poco 16:30, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I looked up the guidelines for the creator, which states the following:
Pictures must have been created by a Wikimedian in order to be eligible for QI status. This means that pictures from, for example, Flickr are ineligible. (Note that Featured Pictures do not have this requirement.) Photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible (and should be licensed PD-old according to the Commons guidelines).
The bolded part refers to (for instance) photographs of historical paintings; the photographer in that case owns the copyright to the picture even if they didn't make the painting. But I think an argument can be made that "photographical reproductions" include scanned pictures by Wikipedians as well (provided there's no further copyright conflict, which isnt the case with images in the public domain), because if the rule applied to photography exclusively it would've just said that. --ReneeWrites (talk) 21:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
I don't think that we can treat photos of paintings the same way like scanned 2D works. For the first one there is room for creativity, for the second hardly. --Poco a poco 16:30, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I think this is more suitable for Valued Image (VI). --Vincent60030 06:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 07:47, 23 September 2020 (UTC)

File:Mantra_-_De_mooiste_vlinders_van_de_stad.png[edit]

  • Nomination Large mural by Mantra aka Youri Casell depicting three huge, hyperrealistic paintings of butterflies on the side of an apartment building --ReneeWrites 22:15, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Lacking detail, sorry. Looks like a mobile phone shot. --Peulle 09:51, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Uploaded a new version, let's discuss if this one meets QI guidelines. --ReneeWrites 20:39, 14 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good for me and interesting -- Spurzem 19:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --Moroder 23:44, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Detail is missing due to hard compression. --Augustgeyler 10:30, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Could you clarify what you mean? --ReneeWrites 11:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Somewhere in processing jpeg the information was hardly compressed to reduce file size. Due to this many details on the architecture as well as in the greenery got lost.--Augustgeyler 12:42, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
  • Augustgeyler: I changed the image based on your feedback, could you take another look at it? --ReneeWrites 22:12, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  • @ReneeWrites: I am sorry. It got better but it is still lacking of detail. I am wondering if that happened before processing, for example by saving to camera with low resolution or high jpeg compression... --Augustgeyler 22:39, 21 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment Updated the image: added detail to the architecture, removed the greenery on the left that lacked detail. --ReneeWrites 20:16, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for QI. --Palauenc05 21:09, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Strongly compressed. --Vincent60030 10:44, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Small, no detail. --Kallerna 11:26, 23 September 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Poco a poco 16:31, 23 September 2020 (UTC)