Commons:Kandidat për imazh cilësor

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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 janar 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 janar 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 January 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]] 01:18, 22 janar 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).


January 22, 2025

January 21, 2025

January 20, 2025

January 19, 2025

January 18, 2025

January 17, 2025

January 16, 2025

January 15, 2025

January 14, 2025

January 13, 2025

January 12, 2025

January 11, 2025

January 10, 2025

January 7, 2025

January 3, 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:20230520_Globularia_bisnagarica.jpg

File:Mercedes-Benz_300_SL,_TC_24,_Essen_(TCE42728).jpg

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 15:45, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mammut,_OutDoor_2018,_Friedrichshafen_(1X7A0185).jpg

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 11:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amur_Falcon_(male)_(vagrant).jpg

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 15:43, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Выборг,_замок_сверху_(2).jpg

Added implicit oppose. --Plozessor 05:18, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I can't see where it's tilted. The tower is vertical and the horizon is horisontal. -- Екатерина Борисова 15:15, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The tower is more or less vertical. But look at the sides. Lamp posts and walls of buildings are leaning outward. Should be easy to correct with gimp or photoshop. --Imehling 20:32, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment The drone photos clearly show us that the Earth is round, and therefore the edges of the image are naturally not vertical :) For example I would like to draw your attention to the fact that the lamp on the bridge is strictly perpendicular to the bridge itself. But I certainly won't be offended if this photo isn't promoted in the end. -- Екатерина Борисова 00:58, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Most of the tilt comes from the low focal length of the lens (12,9 mm). Just try it out with a wide angle zoom lens. The lower the focal length the more tilt you get at the left and right side of your pictures. --Imehling 12:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 11:17, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nérac_-_Église_Saint-Nicolas_-_01.jpg

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 08:13, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:2024-11-02_Germany,_Berlin,_Great_cormorant_DSC_9408_DxO_1.jpg

Running total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 15:44, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lidzbark_Warmiński_2023_44_Collegiate_Church_Plaques.jpg

  • Kandidimi Plaques in Collegiate Church, Lidzbark Warmiński --Scotch Mist 07:43, 7 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Diskutimi
     Oppose good photo but Insufficient quality, sorry. --Reda Kerbouche 13:05, 12 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Was in two minds whether or not to nominate this image for QI as given the small sizes of the metal plaques I think ideally the image should be re-scaled. As nomination now opposed I thought in this instance I should seek the views of others. --Scotch Mist 16:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment @Scotch Mist: Please do not change another user's vote, or convert a decline into a discussion. The discussion vote is used when one party (not the original poster) has voted support and another oppose. --A.B.123 22:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment @A.B.123: Did not change vote - this happened 'automatically' (on selecting 'Discuss') - did not realize it was forbidden to forward a nomination for discussion once an 'oppose' had been lodged - are you sure about this (as it is not evident from the 'Consensual review rules' below)? --Scotch Mist 09:41, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I may be in err, as I have not been active recently but from what was previously discussed on COM:QIC about two years ago was that the poster was not able to change the status to Discuss; however, this may be outdated information on my side, I will refer to the rules. --A.B.123 17:20, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • IMO anybody (including the nominator) can send a picture to discussion if he disagrees with a promotion or decline. Picture should not be sent to discussion if there are just comments but no votes. --Plozessor 03:59, 17 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
✓ Fixed @Plozessor: New version uploaded - no doubt the ‘purists’ will not support this possible solution to comments of low quality and lack of sharpness of this image (which admittedly is probably not the best example for this debate), but while “down-sampling” is generally advised against as a “guideline” for QIs, as far as I know it is not forbidden. Of course the ideal of not losing ‘data’ because of down-sampling is admirable, but in many locations, such as in churches with restricted access and poor lighting, hand-held camera-shots may be necessary and some level of “camera shake” virtually unavoidable. In such circumstances I would suggest that openly re-scaled images be acceptable for QI providing they meet the specified criteria of the other guidelines (in practice it would be better to have an image loaded without re-scaling and then a down-sampled version uploaded as then the ‘original' would still be available to download, otherwise re-scaled images may be the first and only images uploaded). There may be some who will argue that they personally don’t view images at 100% magnification so such images would, in their opinions, pass for QI without re-scaling, but from personal experience I would respectfully counter that these views often do not prevail in practice. While I fully expect that my argument here will get little support and that this image, even if re-scaled further, would be declined for QI, I still believe it worthwhile to encourage debate on the topic of down-sampling as I thought that QI was about “encouraging people” to provide good quality images, even if taking photographs in less than ideal circumstances? --Scotch Mist 13:42, 18 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Thanks for your response - as said previously this "is probably not the best example" to discuss but given the prevailing circumstances of photographing these relatively small engravings\etchings am not sure what "fully sharp" represents practically - would be interested to read other perspectives on the merits, or otherwise, of "downsampling" in specific circumstances. --Scotch Mist 09:52, 19 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment @Peulle: Returned CR 'result' to 'total' (and 'Decline' to 'Discuss') as less than "48 hours since the last entry" (plus no new reviewers since new version of image uploaded).--Scotch Mist 16:31, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment @Scotch Mist: I don't think that's the correct procedure. The vote was closed more than 48 hours after the last vote. As has been discussed before, an "entry" is a vote, not a comment. Otherwise, anyone could delay a decision by "filibustering" with comments to keep the thread alive. --Peulle 08:12, 21 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Peulle 09:16, 20 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)

  • Mar 14 jan → Mër 22 jan
  • Mër 15 jan → Enj 23 jan
  • Enj 16 jan → Pre 24 jan
  • Pre 17 jan → Sht 25 jan
  • Sht 18 jan → Die 26 jan
  • Die 19 jan → Hën 27 jan
  • Hën 20 jan → Mar 28 jan
  • Mar 21 jan → Mër 29 jan
  • Mër 22 jan → Enj 30 jan
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Quality_images_candidates/sq&oldid=908384841"