Jump to content

Commons:Kandidat për imazh cilësor

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
This page is a translated version of a page Commons:Quality images candidates and the translation is 13% complete. Changes to the translation template, respectively the source language can be submitted through Commons:Quality images candidates and have to be approved by a translation administrator.
Shortcut
↓ Kalo tek kandidimi ↓
Other languages:

Këto janë kandidatë për t'u bërë fotografi cilësore. Ju lutem vini re se kjo nuk është e njëjta gjë si fotografi e përkryer. Përveç kësaj, në qoftë se ju vetëm dëshironi disa komente në fotot tuaja ju mund të merrni atë në Commons:Photography critiques.

Qëllimi

Qëllimi i imazhe me cilësi është për të inkurajuar njerëzit që janë themeli i Commons, përdoruesit individual që ofrojnë pamjet unike që të zgjeruar këtë koleksion. While featured pictures identifies the absolute best of all the images loaded into Commons, Quality images sets out to identify and encourage users’ efforts in providing quality images to Commons. Additionally, quality images should be a place to refer other users to when explaining methods for improving an image.


Udhëzimet

All nominated images should be the work of Commons users.

Për nominuesit

Below are the general guidelines for Quality images; more detailed criteria are available at Image guidelines.

Image page requirements
  1. Copyright status. Quality image candidates have to be uploaded to Commons under a suitable license. The full license requirements are at Commons:Copyright tags.
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Quality images shall have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages. It is preferred, but not mandatory, to include an English description.
  4. No advertisements or signatures in image. Copyright and authorship information of quality images should be located on the image page and may be in the image metadata, but should not interfere with image contents.

Krijuesi
Proposed wording changes to specifically exclude AI generate media from being eligable for QI see discussion

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 unless the photographer is a Commons user. (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). If an image is promoted despite not being the creation of a Wikimedian, the QI status should be removed as soon as the mistake is detected.


Technical requirements

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.

Resolution

Bitmapped images (JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF) should normally have at least 2 megapixels; reviewers may demand more for subjects that can be photographed easily. This is because images on Commons may be printed, viewed on monitors with very high resolution, or used in future media. This rule excludes vector graphics (SVG) or computer-generated images that have been constructed with freely-licensed or open software programs as noted in the image's description.

Cilësia e imazhit

Digital images can suffer various problems originating in image capture and processing, such as preventable noise, problems with JPEG compression, lack of information in shadow or highlight areas, or problems with capture of colors. All these issues should be handled correctly.

Composition and lighting

The arrangement of the subject within the image should contribute to the image. Foreground and background objects should not be distracting. Lighting and focus also contribute to the overall result; the subject should be sharp, uncluttered, and well-exposed.

Vlera

Our main goal is to encourage quality images being contributed to Wikicommons, valuable for Wikimedia and other projects.

How to nominate

Simply add a line of this form at the top of Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list Nominations section: 

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description  --~~~~ |}}

The description shouldn't be more than a few words, and please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.

If you are nominating an image by another Wikimedian, include their username in the description as below: 

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description (by [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]]) --~~~~ |}}

Note: there is a Gadget, QInominator, which makes nominations quicker. It adds a small "Nominate this image for QI" link at the top of every file page. Clicking the link adds the image to a list of potential candidates. When this list is completed, edit Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. At the top of the edit window a green bar will be displayed. Clicking the bar inserts all potential candidates into the edit window.

Number of nominations

No more than five images per day can be added by a single nominator.

Note: If possible, for every picture you nominate, please review at least one of the other candidates.

Evaluating images

Any registered user whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits, other than the author and the nominator, can review a nomination. For an easier evaluation you can activate the gadget QICvote

When evaluating images the reviewer should consider the same guidelines as the nominator.

How to review

How to update the status

Carefully review the image. Open it in full resolution, and check if the quality criteria are met.

  • If you decide to promote the nomination, change the relevant line from

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }} to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Promotion|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you liked it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Promotion and add your signature, possibly with some short comment.

  • If you decide to decline the nomination, change the relevant line from

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }} to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Decline|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you didn't like it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Decline and add your signature, possibly with a statement of the criteria under which the image failed (you can use titles of section from the guidelines). If there are many problems, please note only 2 or 3 of the most severe, or add multiple problems. When declining a nomination please do explain the reasons on the nominator’s talk page – as a rule, be nice and encouraging! In the message you should give a more detailed explanation of your decision.

Note: Please evaluate the oldest images first.

Grace period and promotion

If there are no objections within a period of 2 days (exactly 48 hours) from the first review, the image becomes promoted or fails according to the review it received. If you have objection, just change its status to Discuss and it will be moved to the Consensual review section.

How to execute decision

QICbot automatically handles this 2 days after a decision has been made, and promoted images are cached in Commons:Quality Images/Recently promoted awaiting categorization before their automatic insertion in to appropriate Quality images pages.

If you believe that you have identified an exceptional image that is worthy of Featured picture status then consider also nominating the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates.

Manual instructions (open only in cases of emergency)

If promoted,

  1. Add the image to appropriate group or groups of Quality images page. The image also needs to be added to the associated sub pages, only 3–4 of the newest images should be displayed on the main page.
  2. Add {{QualityImage}} template to the bottom of image description page.
  3. Move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives shkurt 2025.
  4. Add the template {{File:imagename.jpg}} to the user’s talk page.

If declined,

  1. move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives shkurt 2025.
  • Images awaiting review show the nomination outlined in blue.
  • Images the reviewer has accepted show the nomination outlined in green
  • Images the reviewer has rejected show the nomination outlined in red

Unassessed images (nomination outlined in blue)

Nominated images which have not generated assessments either to promote nor to decline, or a consensus (equal opposition as support in consensual review) after 8 days on this page should be removed from this page without promotion, archived in Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives February 22 2025 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

Consensual review process

Consensual review is a catch all place used in the case the procedure described above is insufficient and needs discussion for more opinions to emerge.

How to ask for consensual review

To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day.

Please only send things to consensual review that have been reviewed as promoted/declined. If, as a reviewer, you cannot make a decision, add your comments but leave the candidate on this page.

Consensual review rules

See Commons:Quality images candidates#Rules

Page refresh: purge this page's cache

Nominations

Due to the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures will only work on this page if you have JavaScript enabled. If you do not have JavaScript enabled please manually sign with: 

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 17:41, 22 shkurt 2025 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC)
  • Please insert a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first; many are still unassessed
  • If you see terms with which you are unfamiliar, please see explanations at Photography terms
Please nominate no more than 5 images per day and try to review on average as many images as you nominate (check here to see how you are doing).


February 22, 2025

February 21, 2025

February 20, 2025

February 19, 2025

February 18, 2025

February 17, 2025

February 16, 2025

February 15, 2025

February 14, 2025

February 13, 2025

February 12, 2025

February 11, 2025

February 10, 2025

February 9, 2025

February 7, 2025

February 5, 2025

Consensual review

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

  • To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.
  • You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Our QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".
  • The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} and then executed, according to the Guidelines.
Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.
Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted
  • In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add  Oppose and  Support if necessary.
  • Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
  • Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".



File:Honey_in_Rodao_Flea_market,_Sao_Paulo.jpg

A camera from 20 years ago has a smaller sensor, produces lower image quality than current ones, therefore generates more noise, smaller size, among other aspects --Wilfredor 11:51, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:10, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Stuben_Arlbergpass,_Böhringer_2019.jpg

  •  Oppose Per Milseburg, really a great shot, but with these problems in order of importance: 1) significant CA at the mountains on the left side, 2) dust spots in the sky, 3) perspective. --Plozessor 06:21, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Points 1 and 2 now fixes --Wilfredor 12:16, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:06, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cadillac_Lyriq_Auto_Zuerich_2024_DSC_6095.jpg

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Audi_S6_Avant_e-tron_Auto_Zuerich_2024_DSC_6310.jpg

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:04, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Altstadt,_Altdorf_bei_Nuernberg_(P1180267).jpg

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:03, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Norra_Esplanaden_February_2025_03.jpg

Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:02, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:C2023_A3_Tsuchinshan-ATLAS_over_the_Grand_Canyon,_Oct_14.jpg

  •  Comment It is a 16MB crepuscular picture of a very faint object. Both the nucleus and the tail of the the comet are well reproduced. A long exposure was required, and only the bush and the grass in the left-hand corner are out of focus. Grand Canyon strata are distinguishable, even though they are against the source of light. --Harlock81 07:47, 19 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Plozessor 11:46, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Пещера_горы_Богдо_с_видом_на_озеро_Баскунчак.jpg

Running total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Plozessor 18:24, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sverdlov_Street,_Efremov,_Russia,_2024-9_3.jpg

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Plozessor 18:25, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Painted_house_-_Sverdlov_Street,_Efremov,_Russia,_2024-9_1.jpg

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Plozessor 18:26, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Morro_Jable_(Fuerteventura,_Spain),_Strand_--_2025_--_2487_(bw).jpg

  • Kandidimi Structures with different colored sand on the beach of Morro Jable, Fuerteventura, Spain --XRay 07:44, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nuk u miratua
  •  Oppose The original version is already QI (and FP) --Poco a poco 08:14, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • The recurring discussion. In my opinion, the color and black and white development of an image are independent of each other and also clearly different. There is always the question of which differences make a nomination possible, but I think it is permissible in both cases. --XRay 09:22, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Per my understanding, it has been common practice not to promote works derived from other QI, or multiple versions of the same raw image. About black and white as such, I think there are scenes where it makes sense and contributes to the atmosphere of a picture (like a night scene from a dark street), but this is not one of it. --Plozessor 05:37, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Poco a poco. --Kallerna 16:06, 18 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 13:00, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cosmos_caudatus_(80248).jpg

@Robert Flogaus-Faust: Thanks for the tip. The caudatus determination came from someone who was leading a birding walk in this spot, and not a botanist or horticulturalist, so I'm content to defer to your expertise. I've updated the category/description and will move the file once this nomination ends. Rhododendrites 17:12, 20 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 09:51, 21 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jeep_(Colmar)_(1).jpg

✓ Done Perspective correction. Gzen92 21:51, 17 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:59, 22 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)

  • Pre 14 shk → Sht 22 shk
  • Sht 15 shk → Die 23 shk
  • Die 16 shk → Hën 24 shk
  • Hën 17 shk → Mar 25 shk
  • Mar 18 shk → Mër 26 shk
  • Mër 19 shk → Enj 27 shk
  • Enj 20 shk → Pre 28 shk
  • Pre 21 shk → Sht 01 mar
  • Sht 22 shk → Die 02 mar
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Quality_images_candidates/sq&oldid=908384841"