Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/August 2019

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

File:Dobson Stream by Wharfedale hut with the moon, Mt Oxford area, Canterbury, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2019 at 23:44:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dobson Stream by Wharfedale hut with the moon, Mt Oxford area, Canterbury, New Zealand
  • @Basile Morin I'm not sure what you mean by "heavily processed". I only adjusted a few things, mostly the temperature 'cause I thought it was too blue for my taste - perhaps that caused a bit of a "artifical" look. I've uploaded a new version with the original temperature settings from the camera. Otherwise it's not edited much - it's just a really wet and cold long exposure dusk during one of the shortest days of the year. Dead grass everywhere and a crazy Wikimedian with bare feet, a knee deep in the water. --Podzemnik (talk) 10:20, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@Jebulon I don't understand this comment so I don't know what to say. --Podzemnik (talk) 01:19, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
(Translator stepping in) Jebulon is comparing the way the water looks to the liquid metal mercury and it is apparently not to his taste. Some other users normally refer to long exposure water images as "methane lakes", comparing them to the out-of-this-world Lakes of Titan that are liquefied gas. These long exposure photos are always dividing voters, some think it looks cool and other will find it too unnatural. --Cart (talk) 08:34, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the explanation, Cart. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:16, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Mercury is a common filter on most of the image treatment softwares, to make things, like for example water, looking more or less like that. This is water yes, long exposure for sure, but mercury style aspect. Perhaps the oppose is because it lacks natural -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:19, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes of course. Thank you.--Jebulon (talk) 11:43, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Boothsift 04:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand

File:Lutter 10 Pfg 1920.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 16:07:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

10 Pfennig Notgeld banknote (1920) of Lutter am Barenberge, showing a battle scene of the Battle of Lutter on Aug. 27, 1626.
I've added the text to the file description. --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:22, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:09, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Bee arriving at hive sq.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 23:35:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bee arriving at hive
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera
  •  Info Interestingly, there's loads of pics on Commons of bees in flight near flowers, frozen in the air with a focus trap, 1/4000 s shutter speed and sophisticated equipment. For bees approaching the hive the number of photos is less immeasurable (though the share of edited versions much higher), however the dynamics of bee flight is rarely to bee seen (with longer shutter speeds the wings very often are invisible). This point-and-shoot "portrait" is technically not 100% perfect because it's not staged but I found no comparable photo on Commons, and I hope you understand why I think "wow" when I look at this image. Created by Chianti - uploaded by Chianti - nominated by Chianti -- Chianti (talk) 23:35, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Chianti (talk) 23:35, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  CommentIf you think it’s the best image in scope, try Commons:Valued_images. Considering the excellent insect photos we’ve got, this is technically too far below standards, and even a bit overexposed IMO. The wooden structure in the lower left is distracting, I added a crop suggestion (which, btw, moves the bee in question closer to the rule-of-thirds). --Kreuzschnabel 11:27, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment Thank you for your feedback, but FP is not for the technically best pictures. I'd never nominate this as a QI, I'll leave that to the focus-trap-artificial-background-flash-and-studio-equipment-excessive-photoshop techno guys I already mentioned and who have produced loads of excellent pictures of – nothing but single – bees. Sometimes I have the impression that people commenting and judging here are confusing technical quality and editing effort with image content.
Take the POTY 2016 for example: technically far from perfect, the tower in the background between their heads is way too unblurry and distracting, but the photographer didn't take a step to the left and nonetheless managed to catch an incredibly great moment and won deservedly.
I am far from claiming my image should compete for POTY but if you find another image on Commons where you see the contrast between an individual bee and its swarm symbolized by the difference of light and shadow combined with the difference of focus and out of focus plus the individual in flight and other bees sitting at the hive then please post the link. I didn't find a single one, and the reason is: it's incredibly hard to depict such contrast because even the equipment freaks cannot arrange and stage everything. Bees are social animals and the fact that only single bees are shown on the FP page is a shame either for the photographers or for the people judging FP nominations.
Shooting a technically outstanding photo of a single Hymenoptera sitting on a flower is not hard, more than 20 FPs in the category prove it. And they are not really special, please read the introduction of FPC – also the part with the difficult subject.
Show me an image on Commons of a bee in flight or even only sitting where the light part of the body is situated in front of a darker background and the darker part of the body in front of a lighter background. Show me one where you can see that – and how! – a bee moves its wings in flight and still its eye and antenna appear sharp on average desktop resolution. Ask yourself why none of the tech freaks was able to produce a FP where more than only one bee can be seen.
I'm not sure what you mean with "overexposed", no one can avoid overexposure of sunlight reflection on shiny surfaces.
I took a wider crop because I wanted to keep more information about the beehive, but I'll think about your suggestion.--Chianti (talk) 15:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose -- agree Kreuz and narrow DOF Seven Pandas (talk) 12:06, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment I am not sure if you are familiar with basic principles and dependances of DOF, lens aperture and blurred background. You can either have a blurred background to isolate the subject or a wide DOF to get everything sharp. See the POTY I linked above and what I wrote about the message / content of the photo. That all the bees except one are in the shadow and, in addition, blurry, is intentional and essential for the idea of the image. Plus: even in a FP and POTD like Bee mid air.jpg the DOF isn't wide enough for the insect itself.--Chianti (talk) 15:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The main subject is too small and unsharp, also because the background is unattractive. --Cayambe (talk) 14:05, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Background for flying insects now has to be "attractive"? Care to elaborate what you specifically mean or post the link for an example in the FPs of a flying Hymenoptera (Apidae) with an "attractive" background? Thank you.--Chianti (talk) 15:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Hello Chianti and welcome to the FPC, even if you have got off to a bumpy start. You sound quite upset, as do many users who come here for their first nomination. The usual way to FPC is to start at COM:QIC, that way you are eased into the hard conditions and "technical" language we use here. My first suggestion is that you start by nominating your photos for COM:QI, that way you will get tips and help along the way. As one of the "techno freaks" you seem to hate so much, I will try to answer some of your questions (I can't call myself an "equipment freak" since I have the cheapest camera of everyone here, not even a real DSLR). I have some time today, so I'll see if I can clear up a few things for you.
All images at FPC are judged both on a technical level and an emotional. Sometimes the emotional wow for a photo is so great that it beats a poor technical level. Mostly we need both wow and technical level for an FP. POTY is voted for by all users on the wiki-project and the biggest part of those have no clue about photography, they just vote for the pretty/funny picture, so don't let that confuse you.
What people here choose to photograph is simply what they have access to in one way or another. Seeing single bees at flowers is what most can find, going to a beehive is another thing. There might not be any hives nearby or, like me, they might not want to go near one without protective clothing. Still even if your photo is the first here of a bee at a hive, it needs to have a bit more technical quality and composition. Your photo is far from the only "first" photo that gets 'opposes' here. Many FPs are the result of days of test shooting and hundreds of photos at different light and angles, until the right one suddenly appears. I once stalked a rusty chain for three days until I got it right and got my FP.
It is hard to know how to help you or suggest things for you since there is no EXIF data on this or your other photos. That way, I do not know at which level your photo skills are or how you photograph, but you have mentioned a few photo terms so I think you have some knowledge. Most of the work in getting an FP takes place in the editing of the photo. Do you take your photos in jpeg or raw format? That makes a huge difference if you want to make really good photos. You asked how to shoot shiny objects on a bright day, well you step down the EV on your camera, sometimes as much as -1 or -1.5 and raise it again in the post processing. That is a good trick that will keep away overexposed areas. It will also help you not to get the color in the photo desaturated by the strong light.
In this photo, it would also have been much nicer to better see the bees at the hive opening so that it clearly shows that the bee is heading home. Now it is too much in the shade. A very "high tech" way of dealing with such things is to hold something white (like a piece of paper) and reflect a bit of light into the most shadowy part. There are also very bright objects on both sides of the hive opening and they are a bit distracting. There is no shame in toning those down in something like Photoshop.
I have made a rough simulation of what your photo could look like with some of the things I'm talking about here. Since I don't know if you will be insulted my tampering with your photo, I have not uploaded it on Commons by just put it in my Dropbox where you can take a look at it. Here is the link. I hope that we will see your photos at QIC and later here again. New photographers with new ideas and areas to photograph are well liked. :-) You might also want to take a look at COM:PT where a lot of photo tips are collected. All the best, --Cart (talk) 17:58, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose unfortunately, it is a very nice capture but I think it would only be FP if at least some of the hive itself were in focus as well as the bee in flight. I also agree with Cart that some of the bright areas on both sides of the hive need to be toned down - if you shot in RAW, I would suggest pulling back the highlights in Photoshop. And indeed, photos at Picture of the Year are not necessarily a good guide as to what makes an FP. Colin's photo was a well-deserved winner, but when it was nominated at FPC it gathered many opposes and passed by a relatively narrow margin. FPC is very much interested in technical quality - I'd argue sometimes a little too interested, but there we are. Cmao20 (talk) 18:54, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Compostion. Technical quality. Hello Chianti, I hope you found Cart's constructive comments above helpful. Please don't underestimate the community here. To accuse FPC folk of being focus-trap-artificial-background-flash-and-studio-equipment-excessive-photoshop techno guys is unwise. I look at most animal FPCs and I'm struggling to recall one photographer that fits that description! Charles (talk) 20:31, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per others--Boothsift 05:16, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose A real Catch-22 of a photograph ... it would be ideal with just the bee and little of that distracting unsharp background, but then it would be too small for FP, and it's really hard with this sort of subject to walk that tightrope successfully. I do appreciate that you made the effort, though. Daniel Case (talk) 20:30, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 09:20, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schramsberg Vineyards, July 2019-7563+7565.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2019 at 02:34:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wine cellar of Schramsberg Vineyards, Napa Valley, California
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 09:22, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#United_States

File:Water reflection of trees and boats on the Katsura River near Togetsukyo, Kyoto, Japan.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2019 at 10:04:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Water reflection of trees and boats on the Katsura River near Togetsukyo, Kyoto, Japan
  •  very weak oppose Sorry Basile but I think I agree with Christian Ferrer here. It's pretty, and the golden-hour light is nice, but there really isn't a lot to look at except the reflections, which we see a lot of here. And I don't get anything special in terms of composition, with the symmetrical reflections not really providing much tension. If I were to shoot this scene I would have placed the boats at the bottom-right of the composition on an intersecting third. I have provided an image note on the nomination page to show what I mean. That crop would be FP to me, this perhaps not. Cmao20 (talk) 18:45, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"very weak" wikicode
  • Sorry Jebulon, you have been away a while (welcome back!!!) and during that time a new bright programmer has fixed the code and everything with the FPC Bot so that we can now use all of these 'weak' and 'strong' voting templates. If you look in the archive of the talk page to this forum, and my talk page archive, you will see it all. All the best, --Cart (talk) 17:41, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • [[User:--Jebulon (talk) 11:42, 25 July 2019 (UTC)Jebulon|Jebulon]] indirectly makes an interesting point actually. Since we are allowed to use these templates now, should the rules be updated to say that the weak/strong templates can be used at the discretion of the voter? Cmao20 (talk) 19:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't think we need to add them to the official guidelines. They might confuse people into thinking that you can put in "½" vote or "1½" vote. They are counted as just normal votes and are more like colorful and conversational voting templates. They were included into the new code because people were using them despite the earlier "not working" to save us all from a lot of explaining and correcting of votes. The original 's', 'o' and 'n' are still preferred. --Cart (talk) 19:44, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I guess you are right. I think on English Wikipedia, at least at one stage 'weak' support/oppose actually did count as half a vote, and we wouldn't want to give the same impression here. Cmao20 (talk) 21:47, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks everybody for correcting me and comment removal, I was away (as voter, and in these pages only...) for a long time indeed. Anyway, I think that the use of such a template is not a good thing, and I fully agree with Cart. I think the three original templates are enough and not confusing. Everyone is free of comments of course, and I see that the users of « weak something » templates give additionally always many relevant explanations, making the template useless. Simplicity and minimalism are the best IMO...--Jebulon (talk) 11:42, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support.--Vulphere 05:03, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Overall a very serene mood. Daniel Case (talk) 22:49, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Subject very small. Trees and reflection are dominant in frame and not much wow with them (compare many other tree reflection images we have at FP, which mostly have Autumn colours). -- Colin (talk) 14:56, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  very weak support :) I opened the nom thinking I'd probably oppose or abstain, since the thumbnail version struck me as, frankly, not particularly interesting, with so much thick greenery (and its reflection) dominating the frame. Looking at the full size, the color and shapes of the subject contrasts so much with everything else that it made me want to look closer. I felt similar to when browsing the Google Maps satellite view, and you see a little flash of color or geometry in an otherwise natural landscape -- creates the feeling of having stumbled upon something. I think, actually, I would not support if it were cropped, actually, for these reasons. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:25, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --СССР (talk) 01:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:33, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of Denali without labels.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2019 at 18:24:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Painting of Denali National Park by Heinrich Berann

 I withdraw my nomination MER-C 20:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scan Lochkarte Leibniz Rechenzentrum-München 19052019.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2019 at 21:05:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Panorama di Riomaggiore.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2019 at 03:14:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panorama of Riomaggiore, Italy.
True, but fairly representative of the actual lighting. You can see rain up in the hills on the left. --СССР (talk) 05:15, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment Nice idea and worth a support but IMHO the tonemapping has entirely been overdone here – look at the dark roofs having bright seams along their edges! So it’s overprocessed, doesn’t look natural at all. Btw, there’s a badly done cloning on the sea horizon near its right end (supposedly removal of vessel). Could you upload a reworked image? --Kreuzschnabel 11:19, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for reviewing; partially ✓ Done: fixed the dubious patch of the sea near the horizon on the right (was actually a stitching issue). Concerning the other point you raised, I actually don't do tonemapping. I've always preferred minimal post-processing, and the only thing done here was shadow recovery. --СССР (talk) 18:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:12, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Italy

File:2017.07.11.-06-Glienicke-Rietz-Neuendorf --Lindenberger Viadukt.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 12:57:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lindenberger Viaduct
  • Boothsift, I cannot understand what your reason is for the FPX-template. The quality of the picture is good and the composition is a matter of taste. Also the subject. The negative reviews above are just that. So the FPX-template is in no way justified. Please remove it or give a real reason. We have a voting period that can be exhausted. I also appeal to the other users. --Hockei (talk) 10:27, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Boothsift and others, I agree with Hockei that the FPX has become too liberally used. It is intended for photos that do not meet the criteria of the guidelines and should not be used simply because a photo has got off to a bad start. If a nom gets only 'opposes' the bot will archive it early (in five day) anyway. It should not be used to simply get rid of a nom early when the photo has ok QI quality. I'm removing the template. --Cart (talk) 12:39, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak oppose A QI yes, and I don't mind the composition (although I'd have cropped the tree on the left), but not technically there for FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 16:23, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 15:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Huey P. Long Bridge at night (Baton Rouge, Louisiana).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2019 at 05:11:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Baton Rouge bridge
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges
  •  Info created by WClarke - uploaded by WClarke - nominated by WClarke -- wclarke 05:11, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- wclarke 05:11, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The trees cover up too much of the bridge IMO--Boothsift 05:31, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Not bad, but QI not FP for me. A little bit noisy, and the resolution and composition aren't quite good enough to make up for that. Cmao20 (talk) 15:57, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Cmao20: Quite frankly I disagree. The scene was very dark when I took the photo, and it’s a 30 second I shot at 400 ISO, only one stop above my camera’s native ISO 200 — considering how dark it was, the noise is very minimal for a night photograph in those conditions — it was taken on a full-frame DSLR, I’m not sure how much noise you’re expecting given these factors. Also, a note on image resolution — how big is big enough? 12 megapixel is a completely respectable size, you would be able to make a 24x16 inch print with this photograph without any problems and for web viewing, zooming in at 100% you can still great detail. Another thing about technical quality — it’s hard to deny that this image has great dynamic range, with a wide array of colors, lights and darks, yet still with no clipping anywhere. That’s far more important than negligible noise and acceptable resolution. Also, it’s a multi-layered composition, showing the river, the vegetation surrounding, and the bridge; how would you improve it? Thanks. wclarke 18:12, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • WClarke,thanks for your detailed reply and for talking about the conditions under which you took the photo. I have changed my vote to  Neutral as I think an outright oppose is probably harsh.
My point about resolution was not to suggest that 12mpx is poor resolution, it absolutely isn't, and as you say it's easily sufficient for a decent-sized print. However, at FPC we regularly see images of this kind that are 30-40 mpx, and though this image is certainly good, it's not at that level. Thus, I would argue that for an image to be seen as the 'finest Commons has to offer', if the resolution is 12mpx I would expect it to be more-or-less perfect at full-size (except for macro shots and photos with greater technical challenges, where I would be much more forgiving). As for composition, I must say I agree with Boothsift that the trees cover up too much of the bridge. I feel that the bridge itself is too far off to the left of the frame, and that too much of the picture focusses on the trees rather than the bridge - because for a picture of a bridge I'd prefer to see as much as possible of the bridge itself, if that makes sense. I'm also not sure I like the little corner of the path at the bottom-left - I'd like to see either more of the path or none at all - but that's only a minor point.
Finally, there are a few other minor technical criticisms (which you might be able to address). In a few places I can see chromatic aberrations (especially on the tree to the left of the picture), of both the green and purple variety. There are also some slightly unusual speckles of colour (especially blue) at the bottom-right in the water; I can't think what caused them, but it should be possibly easily to clone them out. Cmao20 (talk) 19:12, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
+1 -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:47, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  weak support Probably closer to neutral, given some of the points already brought up above, but I don't mind the composition (apart from the bottom-left bit) and find that the long exposure makes for an interesting view, with nice contrast. — Rhododendrites talk |  18:13, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 15:02, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wiesenknopf Blüte 6260037-PSD-PSD.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2019 at 12:59:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flower of the salad burnet or small burnet
  •  strong support Very nice motif. A veil of subdued greens provides an excellent background for the intensely red bristles, the yellow pollen-bearers, and their pure white stalks. At top resolution thousands of sharply defined pollen globules appear. My full respect if this stack was taken outside of a studio! Nevertheless, some "messy" areas appear between stalks, but this (as I know due to my own delving into this tricky photographical technique) is inevitable with such criss-crossing details, as the stalks at front partially cover up those behind and the hindmost are almost completely bereft of any processible details. Yes, an admirable state-of-the-art focus stack for such a difficult subject! --Franz van Duns (talk) 14:38, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:19, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support per Franz, looks quite excellent to me. Cmao20 (talk) 15:59, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:59, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Too many of those "ghosts" you get from the unsharp areas in some photos around the selected sharp areas. A higher f-number (longer dof) and consequently fewer photos would probably have solved that problem. 23 photo seems a bit like overkill to me. --Cart (talk) 17:09, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment F5 is quite high at 1/25 second and a moving object. With an image scale close to 1:1, so many frames are actually necessary.--Ermell (talk) 21:11, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:03, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Canterbury Cathedral font, Kent, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 19:51:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The font of Canterbury Cathedral, viewed from the north eastern side of the nave.
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:36, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Passiflora caerulea STEREO (R-L) 2019-06-27.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Aug 2019 at 17:01:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two Passiflora caerulea flowers arranged as a stereo image pair
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
  •  Info created by Franz van Duns - uploaded by Franz van Duns - nominated by Franz van Duns -- Franz van Duns (talk) 17:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I have supplemented 2 other versions on the image page: (a) with reversed images for parallel viewing and (b) the right image of the stereo pair as an individual image. These versions are provided as follows: (a) for those who possess a stereoscopic viewer and (b) for the large group of individuals (20-40% by some assessments) who cannot combine stereo images into one composite image. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 17:01, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Brilliant, especially when viewed as a stereo image. It's nice to see people on Commons doing that kind of work. But it would be FP even without, for me. Cmao20 (talk) 19:26, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question -- where were these photos taken? Seven Pandas (talk) 21:46, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Do we have a tool to facilitate viewing this on-wiki? I really appreciate the nomination, but I feel like it's hard to evaluate with just a cross-eyed method? — Rhododendrites talk |  23:07, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment As mentioned above I have added a separate version for parallel viewing on the image page. Alas, I do not know of any tool within the Wiki universe that would enable parallel or cross-eyed viewing. Anyone else?
      Speaking for myself, I can focus on a stereo image of any size via cross-eyed viewing within seconds (even 27" full screen is no problem), but have great difficulties with parallel viewing, even with a black cardboard placed all the way from nose to screen to separate the images. My wife cannot focus on any variant of "free-floating" 3D images, only a (long gone) primitive plastic stereoscope with tiny images that she had possessed as a child did the trick. I guess we must wait for the arrival of a stereo viewer that can deal with stereo images side by side on a 27" screen. Any ideas? -- Franz van Duns (talk) 13:08, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment A way to expierience a parallel view image in 3D is to load the image with any gallery app on any smartphone and putting the smartphone in any VRgoggles. No additional software (VR or other) is needed. Even people who normally have no 3D vision (but can see with both eyes but because of a medical condition in 2D only) will experiences the 3D effect (but only for some minutes as the vision region of the brain is not used to it, and will stop to process 3D information). Any VRgoggles will do. In germany "Euroshop" sells cardboard versions in starwars design at 1 €. --C.Suthorn (talk) 18:25, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment @C.Suthorn: Thank you for this vital hint! As you might have guessed by my appeal to all, I don't have access to any of the required stereo display apps and this obvious solution simply didn't occur to me at the moment of writing.
      This is maybe slightly off-topic, but it is nevertheless very intensely related to the topic of "which options do I have to easily view stereo images" and I surely am not the only person who encounters this problem seeking a solution. I do own a Microsoft Lumia 950XL I purchased some years ago because of the (then) top quality take-along camera, but I download all images for further processing on to my 32 GByte RAM workhorse desktop computer and so far haven't encountered the need to install anything on my smartphone.
      Perhaps a modernised and informative image on the relevant wikipedia pages "Stereoscopy" and "de:Stereoskopie" plus a short descriptive article describing how to "easily achieve stereo viewing by means of a smartphone and a simple cardboard VR goggle" would inspire those looking for such a simple solution. If someone would provide the German version I'd do the English translation - or vice versa.
      P.S.: I've just surveyed some of the German online market sites, but most cardboard VR goggles won't accept the Lumia's 6.5" size without a lot of extra cutting. Well, why not, the only parts I really need seem to be the two identical lenses! -- Franz van Duns (talk) 10:03, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment @All: First of all a great Thank You for your support!
      Just one more comment as a temporary summary to this look-aside thread. Would it be of any interest to continue this subject on e.g. the talk page of "Stereoscopy" or "de:Stereoskopie" with the intent of adding modernised content?
      First impression with my smartphone: unaided cross-eyed viewing works straight out of the box, albeit with a complete loss of detail. I.e., although the Lumia has exactly the same resolution as my 27" monitor (2560x1440 pixels) the perceived resolution is absolutely dismal. Haven't yet purchased a cardboard smartphone VR viewer with integrated lenses for parallel arranged stereo images; this contraption should hopefully improve my viewing experience. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 11:22, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think it might be useful to start a page not on Wikipedia but on Commons, with the aim of explaining the different forms and different ways to view them. I have a Google Cardboard somewhere, but I don't really want to have to pull out my phone for it. I can see the cross-eyed images, but it's not a pleasurable/practical experience to use that method, which is why I asked about others. Regardless,  Support. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:21, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
        • It might be a start, to replace the image of a viewmaster as icon in the parallel view template with VR goggles. I do not think, that many people know what a viewmaster is, or how it works. (and it will even show only viewmaster images, almost all of which are copyrighted and not available for commons) --C.Suthorn (talk) 20:55, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support - Impressive even just looking at one image and then the other. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:34, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support.--Vulphere 16:10, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Boothsift 18:27, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:41, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Llez (talk) 15:11, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:35, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:View of Baldy Hill and surrounding ranges, Canterbury, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 20:45:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of Baldy Hill and surrounding ranges, Canterbury, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:37, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Pterodroma mollis light morph - SE Tasmania 2019.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2019 at 03:31:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The soft-plumaged petrel (Pterodroma mollis) is a species of seabird in the family Procellariidae.
First I also thought so. But there similar photographs of the uploader, therefore I think it's not photoshoped. No evidence but a hint. --Berthold Werner (talk) 07:38, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The edge of the wave looks astonishingly sharp to me. It is the same with the edges of the bird. It appears slightly artificial to mee, too. But I'm not familiar with the area, where the image was made. I would like to see the unprocessed original and then compare the two. Greetings --Dirtsc (talk) 08:51, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I have discussed the photographic techniques he uses with JJ Harrison because I cannot replicate them with my equipment. He says it is because he uses a prime lens (which I don't have). He says that he does not use software to alter backgrounds - e.g. blurring. So still a mystery to me. Charles (talk) 09:07, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Enough with the bad faith. JJ Harrison is one of our most esteemed bird photographers, I can't imagine why he would resort to montage. I'd write this up as a very lucky shot combined with great photo skills unless the author himself says otherwise. Besides there is color reflection from the bird on the wave and that is very hard to photoshop. --Cart (talk) 10:21, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not you Charles, don't worry, you seem to have an open mind about this. But if you read the comments you see that some users have expressed suspicions about this ("background looks very artificial", "I would like to see the unprocessed original", "appears like a photoshop montage", "No evidence but a hint"). I'd say that is bad faith wrt to JJ Harrison being honest about his photos. A.Savin has even emailed the photographer to obtain proof that this is real (see comment below). He is of course within his right to do so, but I think it is bad form among colleagues. This is like the time I was accused of pasting a moon just because it was too well photographed. --Cart (talk) 17:40, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you. But I don't see any problem in the questioning. I too asked JJ for out-of-camera RAW during the FP nomination on English Wikipedia. There are no hard-and-fast rules here about the level of manipulation we should accept, so surely doubters have a right to ask? Charles (talk) 18:09, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 27 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 12:05, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Ardea cinerea (Grey heron) eating fish.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 06:11:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ardea cinerea (Grey heron) eating fish
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:43, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Family_:_Ardeidae_(Herons)

File:Murex ternispina 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 06:04:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Shell of a Triple Spined Murex, Murex ternispina
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:43, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:Native Garhwali Woman In Rishikesh.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 04:28:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Native Garhwali Woman at Rishikesh, Uttarakhand
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:44, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait

File:Nepali hindu bride.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2019 at 10:17:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  •  Comment Nirmal Dulal, you can only have to open nominations at the same time, this is your third. If you want this re-opened you have to {{withdraw}} one of the other nominations. You can of course make this nomination again later. --Cart (talk) 10:31, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Cart, I withdraw this nomination. Thanks for suggestion. -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 10:39, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very nice. It would be great with some better description on the file page. It says that she is welcoming, but who is she welcoming? What religion have these weddings. Remember that most of us don't know anything about how things are in Nepal but we like to learn. :-) We also like the location to be a bit more specific. Could you please add in what town or district this was taken. Thank you, --Cart (talk) 11:05, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @W.carter: Hindu religion. She is welcoming her future husband, most probably. ;o) In traditional Hindu weddings, the bride and the bridegroom do not go together to the ceremony. They arrive separately, each with their family. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:12, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Great! When you nominate a photo for FPC, make sure you tell us as much as you can about what is in the photo. That makes it easier for us "foreigners" to understand it and to use it in the right articles and settings. Thanks, --Cart (talk) 11:25, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:46, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women

File:Paisaje en el parque nacional de Namib-Naukluft, Namibia, 2018-08-05, DD 41-47 PAN.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2019 at 13:04:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape in Namib-Naukluft National Park, Namibia.
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:45, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Peach-leaved bellflower.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 06:58:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Peach-leaved bellflower just after opening
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 14:42, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Flowers

File:Demonstration Before Raft-Rafting in Trishuli River, Nepal-3060.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2019 at 13:48:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • That said, since I liked the freshness of it, I did have a go at it to see is it could be improved to focus on the nice aspects of the photo. Would you consider this editing? If you think I'm intruding on your photo, I apologize. Cheers, --Cart (talk) 10:01, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco2 22:13, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gare - couloir nord (Strasbourg) (2).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 07:35:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco2 22:15, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Playa Noordhoek, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-23, DD 126.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 20:37:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Noordhoek Beach, South Africa
Never mind correcting me; it's not. Daniel Case (talk) 04:17, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco2 22:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Stopwatch, 1810201155, ako.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 18:55:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Focus stack of a vintage stopwatch.
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Poco2 22:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Mengerschwamm mit Schattenlicht 01082019 8K 001.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2019 at 08:20:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 12:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Medieval Glassblower-1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2019 at 15:21:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 12:08, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 12:22, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rocknroll singer amk.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Aug 2019 at 03:54:02
Rocknroll singer Johnny Trouble

  • The other photo is great but there is more than one way to shoot concert photography and various lighting and set conditions. The other photo was clearly taken in daylight outside. I strongly suggest, if you think this is a "bad composition" that you get yourself acquainted with some professional photographs of musicians at concerts. This is very standard composition/angle. I shall not even waste my time arguing about the other criticism you make, except to note that of course I disagree with them. Unwatching. -- Colin (talk) 07:26, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The composition is bad in my opinion because the subject is seen from an extreme angle, almost from behind. Similar problem last week, not promoted for this good reason. I'm sorry for the photographer, but honesty and diversity in the reviews help to understand flaws sometimes. There is a distracting and awkwardly cropped lamp at the top right corner, which is just not welcome in this frame aesthetically for the balance. Despite the violent light, I have good eyes and don't need to refer to professional photographs to see the focus is on the microphone, not on the face. This is more similar to a snapshot from a smartphone, we all possess today but that was not widespread at this time. The image might have been exceptional for some reason in 2007, now it has lost a lot. The hand is cut, and it would have been better to center the frame more to the bottom, for action. Quite obvious. Most of the visible parts of the face are blurry (ear, eye, chin). "I shall not even waste my time arguing about the other criticism you make, except to note that of course I disagree with them. Unwatching" Everyone is free to share and learn, of course -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:05, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Mainly I just think the delist mechanism should only be used in clear-cut cases for an image that should never have passed FP in the first place, or for pictures that are technically outmoded or superceded. In my opinion this is not a great photo, but it's not so far away from the standard that I think it's worth a delist nomination being opened. Cmao20 (talk) 19:11, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Examples of professional photographs : 1, 2, 3... -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:45, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    • Basile, for someone who enjoys arguing so much, this is a crap argument to make. Three cherry-picked examples, drawn from a subject domain of millions, with a huge variety of photographic style, not to mention musician style. Those three photos are boring and unrepresentative of their flamboyant subjects. Save us from boring photos. -- Colin (talk) 11:14, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 3 delist, 9 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --A.Savin 12:19, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:June Lake Mammoth September 2016 panorama.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2019 at 01:11:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

June Lake, California
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States

File:2017.07.11.-04-Lindenberg (Tauche)--Barbarossa-Fliege-Maennchen.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 13:06:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eutolmus rufibarbis, male
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:25, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera

File:Dülmen, Wildpark -- 2015 -- 8894-8.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 12:38:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places

File:Slovyansk Voskresenska church.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2019 at 15:27:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Resurrection Church in Sloviansk, Donetsk Oblast, Ukraine
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:51, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Ferrari-Monaco-4071021.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 21:17:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ferrari 488 Rear View
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 05:12, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles

File:Lower Antelope Canyon November 2018 008.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2019 at 02:50:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sandstone formation, Lower Antelope Canyon
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 05:11, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States

File:Schramsberg Vineyards, July 2019-7579+7580.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2019 at 03:26:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Tasting room in the wine cellar of Schramsberg Vineyards, Napa Valley, California
  • Very very slight improvement, no much change though, concerning the light. That might be a matter of taste of course. I very rarely enjoy subjects in the darkness in general. Here these bottles are suggested, but it's hard to distinguish them really. Perhaps another angle closer to the lamp would have worked better -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:22, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 05:11, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#United_States

File:Valtioneuvoston linna.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 20:57:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Government Palace, Helsinki.
 Comment: thank you for the review. This was taken not too long before sunset, which is evidenced by the long shadows, when light is conventionally considered anything but dull. And I'm quite perplexed by the "sterile" comment, to be honest :-) --СССР (talk) 11:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • The light may appear dull but it may well just be a slightly underexposed photo similar to your other nom, which is also a bit too dark IMO. I know my artsy-fartsy language can perplex users here. In this case it looks, to me, too stark, unfriendly, like no living thing could survive there. Please compare with the more vibrant File:Government Palace - Marit Henriksson.jpg (but without the man and the bus). Then again, looking at your uploads, they are all on the dark side, so perhaps that is simply your style. There is an easy way of checking if a photo is toned down too much: Take a color sample at the points that should be totally bright with no black, like the sun glints on the clock or the dots from reflections of the sun on the street lights. In this photo those points have between 5-10% black. --Cart (talk) 12:00, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That image has quite a few blown highlights, which I really dislike in photos. But perhaps I do make my photos a bit too dark in order to avoid that. Thank you for constructive remarks. --СССР (talk) 00:05, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019-07-20 Lennon Wall in Hong Kong book fair(2).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2019 at 15:01:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A part of Lennon Wall in Hong Kong book fair
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cormorants silhouette in La Jolla (70737).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 19:15:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Silhouette of cormorants in a tree at sunset in La Jolla, California

File:One WTC NY1.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2019 at 00:41:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

One World Trade Center
According to FP guidelines Cmao20, I'm not sure you should be promoting an image that is "Fairly good quality" and where "the composition isn't perfect". Shouldn't that be a neutral vote? 08:35, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Not really, it's just that to me the wow of the subject outweighs the flaws of the image. There's something sleek and modernist about it, and I enjoy that we're looking up at the building. Cmao20 (talk) 16:15, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination Acroterion (talk) 01:50, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abstract-Artwork- 1330.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 04:51:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abstract-Artwork
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 12:21, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:View from Foggy Peak to Craigieburn Range, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 00:06:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from Foggy Peak to Craigieburn Range, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:20, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:142 Eva Nilsson and 143 Clara Nilsson Moseby in Musselloppet 2019.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 14:07:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

142 Eva Nilsson and 143 Clara Nilsson Moseby in Musselloppet 2019
ANU closed - no action
  • Charles, you are always welcome to oppose my photos, as you so very often do, but please do not critizise the people in the photos. Not all running competitions (or parts of) are about skills and winning, many of them are about having a good time. Thank you, --Cart (talk) 17:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not criticising the runners, just your ill-judged choice of submitting this image to FP. Did they want to be here? Do they even know they are here? Serious athletes can expect to be photographed and see their faces in a newspaper, but fun runners? Who are clearly identified. I'd be horrified if it happened to me. Charles (talk) 20:06, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Now you are just twisting things to turn this on me instead. It may be an unknow competition to you, but not so here. It is covered by Swedish west coast newspapers, radio stations, Swedish runner websites, etc. I was far from the only photographer at the race and the runners are very well aware of this. This is one of many sports events in Sweden where ordinary people mix with elite athletes, the biggest being Vasaloppet. Every participant in these sports events knows what to expect. --Cart (talk) 20:30, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oh really? You finish in 61 minutes (the leading female competitor took 38 minutes) and then expect to be immortalised in a 'competition' to be one of the finest pictures on Wikipedia without your agreeing? I don't think so. Charles (talk) 20:42, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Are you suggesting that it is ok for the photo to be on Commons, but not ok to nominate it for FP because the runners are not elite runners or in the first group to finish? If so please take this to ANU so we can get this sorted out, because that is a rule I'm unfamilliar with. We have a lot of people without notability who have been "immortalised" as FPs. What is the difference between this nom and this photo (named, not notable, didn't win)? --Cart (talk) 20:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for dropping by Granada and thanks for the tips. I'm no way near as good at this as you, but learning and testing. The reason I dared nominate this, was that there are very few photos of women runners of good resolution and I thought that might tip the scale in favor of this. You never know. --Cart (talk) 09:37, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cockpit Ovali 1957.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 08:48:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cockpit of a 1957 Volkswagen Beetle
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sphinx moth (Adhemarius gannascus).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 09:06:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sphinx moth (Adhemarius gannascus)
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Waterfalls, Oghuz ( 1090526).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 12:57:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Series of small waterfalls in the foothills of the Greater Caucasus near Oghuz, Azerbaijan
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mallnitz Christkönigskirche Innenraum 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 16:23:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Christ the King Church Mallnitz
@King of Hearts: I was also struggling with this, until I realized that the floor plan of the church is an irregular pentagon (visible e.g. at Google Maps) --Uoaei1 (talk) 07:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
In that case, I take back the "weak" - it's the best possible image that could have been obtained in these circumstances. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:00, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:46, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Boys playing street football in Egypt.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 04:31:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Children playing street football in Egypt
@Yann: But with the crop it's just the five guys and the ball—none of that distracting stuff at right or the wasted space on the bottom. Daniel Case (talk) 22:08, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, What you call "distracting stuff", I call them "spectators" as they are watching the boys, and what you call "wasted space", I call it "necessary head room". You don't need to ping me. I follow my nominations. Regards, Yann (talk) 14:18, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:44, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

Heinrich Berann NPS Panoramas, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 14:10:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • Denali National Park (1994)
    Denali National Park (1994)
  • North Cascades National Park (1987)
    North Cascades National Park (1987)
  • Yellowstone National Park (1991)
    Yellowstone National Park (1991)
  • Yosemite National Park (1989)
    Yosemite National Park (1989)
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:45, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Maps

File:Moscow (2019-07-27), photo by Ilya Varlamov DSC 2552.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 12:31:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rally in support of opposition candidates for deputies of the Moscow City Duma. 2019-07-27
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 9 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Boothsift 17:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Three teenagers on a jetski running at full speed on the Mekong.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 00:17:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Three teenagers on a jetski running at full speed on the Mekong
  • These facial expressions are very particular, and compared to the other picture all the 3 people are visible. I love the way they are clinging to each other. Same sport but different composition and different riders. Compare this and this, this and this : they're all FP with much more similarities -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:57, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • True, but honestly I wouldn't supported the images in the pairs you quote above becoming FP either. They're just too similar to me. It's by the same principle, I think, that both of us were hesitant to support this since this was already featured. Cmao20 (talk) 19:12, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Very good example, and this is certainly subjective, like that one which appears too similar to this in my view. I don't expect to make you change your mind, but as you seem embarrassed by my nomination ("Sorry Basile, I was about to support"...) I feel obliged to defend the initiative. Not to get your support, but to say this is not redundant in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:47, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 23:14, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Two kids discovering the fascinating nature.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2019 at 21:23:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kids discovering the nature
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: A nice and cute photo but unfortunately the quality is below what is expected of a Featured Picture. Please nominate your photos at COM:QIC first for a pre-evaluation. Thank you, --Cart (talk) 21:53, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Geometric design rhodian plate.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 05:17:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ancient greek rhodian plate. "Wild goat" style, created around 600 to 550 BC.

 I withdraw my nomination --Boothsift 17:50, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 12:27, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for nomination, Boothsift. It is a nice and fascinating object for sure, and a good historical document, but I agree with opposers. Due to the conditions (museum, no flash, glass...) it not at the FP level.--Jebulon (talk) 11:08, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bryce Canyon Hoodoos.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 19:30:29
SHORT DESCRIPTION 

Result: 6 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --A.Savin 12:25, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peaks between Hukere Stream and Shift Creek valley, Nelson Lakes National Park, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2019 at 21:08:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Peaks between Hukere Stream and Shift Creek valley, Nelson Lakes National Park, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 09:22, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand

File:Wandering spider (Cupiennius getazi) with female katydid prey (Tettigoniidae sp.).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2019 at 08:24:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wandering spider (Cupiennius getazi) with female katydid (or bush cricket) prey (Tettigoniidae sp.)
Yes, did you spot the thread supporting his body weight? Charles (talk) 17:36, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is visible at thumb. --Cart (talk) 17:39, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It is stacked with just two hand-held images Ermell, but properly disclosed. New version uploaded. Charles (talk) 09:10, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:26, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida

File:Golden-eyed tree frog (Agalychnis annae) 3.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2019 at 16:25:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden-eyed tree frog (Agalychnis annae) in Costa Rica

 I withdraw my nomination I'll nominate the other one. Charles (talk) 19:43, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 20:38, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:JarrahFence gobeirne.jpg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2019 at 17:28:24
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  •  Info Not very sharp nor interesting. The flower in the picture is a bird of paradise (Strelitzia) and like wooden fences, they are fairly common. We have better pictures of picket fences with better compositions. (Original nomination)
  •  Delist -- Boothsift 17:28, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist Was made an FP in 2005, but is no longer one in 2019, IMO.--Peulle (talk) 18:26, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist per nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 20:46, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist Nice idea but bad crop, and by no means outstanding. --Kreuzschnabel 21:34, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep We really need to stop this, please Boothsift, find another thing to do. This passed happily as an FP and has not deteriorated, nor is FP chock full of superior alternatives. I really really really do not think delist is simply another chance for you to spin the roulette wheel of whatever the random audience of the day finds "interesting". That you personally disagree with the original reviewers is not a reason to delist. Why do we keep seeing "not very sharp" spurious delist rationales? Go look up "plane of focus". This is just optics: some bits are sharp and some are not. Not every picture on Commons is a boring "passport identification photo" for the top-right of a Wikipedia article or needs to be focus stacked from 26 images. The fact that the plant or this fence is, in your opinion, "fairly common" isn't relevant. There are lots of fence designs and this one certainly isn't common where I live. Apparently it is typical of Western Australia, made of Jarrah (Eucalyptus marginata) and is a picket fence -- and is illustrative enough to be used in all three articles and on 27 different Wikipedias. As I mentioned in a previous nomination, any fool can find faults with an image if they are so inclined. And anyone can support/delist "per nom" without mental or emotional effort. It is even easier when the nominator isn't around and you don't even take the courtesy to inform them of the delist. It takes a bit of artistic confidence to explain why an image is appealing, and this is clearly a good illustration of a Australian Jarrah Picket fence. Selecting old FPs for reviewing once again is imo a dumb way to spend your time on earth, and is a waste of our time as reviewers. Move on. -- Colin (talk) 07:48, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment While I like your point about how this is a good illustration of this type of fence, I cannot agree with your final point. Just as adding new FPs is what we do here, we should also review existing FPs from time to time. As the Guidelines point out, "The purpose of featured picture status is to recognize that an image is currently among the most valuable images—the top fraction of a percent. As overall image quality improves, some images will be delisted." Therefore we need an active process of looking at the old images again; it's not time wasted, it's what this place is for. Some images will be delisted while others will be kept as the Community votes on it.--Peulle (talk) 08:30, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep absolutely per Colin. This delisting spree should end, imo --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:16, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist On the one hand, I don't find mass campaigns on delisting useful -- perhaps we should limit the number of active delist nominations per user too, just like we have the 2 FP nominations limit. On the other hand, what do I see on this picture? A wooden fence that is rather boring (if not to say ugly), and a plant behind it, that is not prominently visible. Really nothing eye-catching here and I doubt that I would have supported this picture even back in 2005. --A.Savin 11:36, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Peulle, etc, I'll offer two ideas:
    • Just because you can, doesn't mean you should. Repeat this internally every time you justify something is allowed/permitted/described by "the rules". We had very few and infrequent delists of this sort until recently. What has changed isn't the rules, but a behaviour by a few nominators. Perhaps we'll need to change the rules to stop this behaviour, but it would be easier if it just stopped by itself.
    • Why wasn't I consulted? "This image is a featured picture, and I wasn't consulted, and now that I look at it, I don't think it is all that great. I want my opinion to be heard and count. Look, I can press this [Delist] button and the Internet will get to hear my views on it. I have a voice that will be heard!" This is the question that the author of that linked article claims the Internet provides an answer for [which doesn't make it good, it just is]. We need to recognise that most people here today were not reviewing back then. You have a different opinion than them. So what? It is not, in the grand scheme of things, important that your and my opinions today influence the entire body of work we call "Featured Pictures". Some of it was decided by other people. Deal with it. -- Colin (talk) 12:15, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Colin, I actually have a lot of sympathy with what you’re saying, it does seem to be a waste of time for the community to spend so much energy assessing old images rather than focussing on reviewing high-quality content being produced today. That said, Boothsift opened the review, and I agree with A. Savin that I probably wouldn’t have supported this picture even in 2005. But I don’t think I fit into your category of people who are voting to delist images ‘per nom’ without putting in any effort, and in fact I’ve strongly defended at least two images recently against what I saw as unfair delist requests even though they probably wouldn’t be promoted today. Cmao20 (talk) 16:02, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cmao20, my point about "anyone can support/delist "per nom" without mental or emotional effort" doesn't of course mean that any one such vote did not involve effort. Some people put a lot of investigation and effort into their support votes at FPC but we know that it doesn't require any effort to vote support. And a "per nom" rationale also doesn't require any effort. Similarly for a delist, then the default "no brain required" vote is to agree to delist. You don't have to justify it with any rationale of your own. That's what makes these so harmful and such a timesink for anyone who does want to take the time. And it also says to the voters of the first nomination that those guys really were wasting their time. They clearly should have waited for more intelligent and gifted reviewers to turn up ;-). -- Colin (talk) 18:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Colin: I find it ironic that you're doing the same thing you're complaining about - if someone is of the opinion that some images should be tested for delisting, why are their opinions worth less than yours? Just because you're carpet bombing the discussion with bold text, that doesn't necessarily mean you're in the right. The nominations are following the guidelines and so far, it's not like all the noms have been dismissed - some have been supported and others rejected. So in the spirit of "dealing with it": if you don't agree with their nominations, either refrain from voting on them or (better) utter your opinion in order for it to carry the day. If the community agrees with your points, your view will prevail.--Peulle (talk) 16:11, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ha ha I probably did get carried away with the bold. I'm really not doing the same thing. What we are doing now is having a discussion, and you can write more or fewer words if you want while this page is open. The community have (and had) the opportunity to agree and disagree while the nomination is (was) open. But once the nomination is closed, why should it be re-opened? One can make an argument that an image, in its category, is simply outclassed now. But that's not Boothsift's argument. He doesn't like the picture. He doesn't find it interesting. He didn't get the chance to vote last time and wants one now. I don't think that is a reasonable or respectful thing to do. It is quite disrespectful to those nine people who supported it the first time, and doing this in secret without alerting the photographer, is rather disrespectful to them. -- Colin (talk) 18:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why should it be re-opened? To satisfy the point made in the guidelines, of course, what else? It says that "As overall image quality improves, some images will be delisted". That means we should reexamine images from time to time. While I would agree with you that it would be against the intentions of the guidelines to open a delist nomination shortly after an FP nomination concluded, this image was promoted in 2005! Surely there is a chance that in the last 14 years, overall image quality has improved to the point at which this is no longer an FP. Sorry bub, you're losing this debate. And the vote, it seems.--Peulle (talk) 21:52, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Colin: I sincerely apologize for opening this nomination as I wasted your time and for being dumb. Thank you for attacking me, rather than reasonably justifying your opinion. There is absolutely no need to go that far and if you don't like delist nominations, then we can have a vote to get rid of them. Do you think I would care? I said it before, I'm not here to nominate every single Featured Picture in existence to be delisted and I have voted "Keep" for quite a few. I listened to your opinions and withdrew a nomination. Now please keep calm and let me decide what I want to do with my own life. I have nothing against fences, but I don't like this picture. Therefore, I nominated it. Not because I don't like this type of fence nor birds of paradise, but because I found this picture uninteresting. In most of the original nominations, they barely passed anyways. So I don't what you're trying to convey here other than you hate people who open delist nominations like me and Tomer and you think the guidelines are a waste of time --Boothsift 17:27, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Boothsift, there have been many complaints about the recent delists, and there is an open discussion at Talk FPC. You have chosen to ignore or not participate and carry on nominating delists (10 in the last month). Be careful to read carefully in case you make false claims like "attacking me". I didn't call you dumb. I said you were doing a dumb thing, and something that requires no intelligence, skill, effort or consideration of others to do. Your argument "In most of the original nominations, they barely passed anyways." is simply untrue. In many of your delists there was strong and enthusiastic support, and remember that FPC had lower numbers of participants in the past and thresholds were different. There are hundreds of FPs that "barely passed". They are still FPs. Look at your argument now: "I don't like this picture" and "because I found this picture uninteresting". So this isn't because Commons now has so many excellent photos of Western Australian Jarrah Picket Fences that this old one is an embarrassment, but because you weren't consulted the first time, and so you want the nomination reopened so you can be consulted now. -- Colin (talk) 18:47, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment This does not seem to be a clear cut delist, but quite a number of recent delist requests have not been contentious. These delist requests are valid. I don't think that the rationale of 'Not very sharp nor interesting. The flower in the picture is a bird of paradise (Strelitzia) and like wooden fences, they are fairly common' is valid. Nor do I think that Colin should accuse Boothsift of 'doing a dumb thing'. Charles (talk) 19:16, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • ✘[No] Colin's hostile comments are completely unacceptable. This nomination is perfectly fine, respecting the guidelines, and it has obvious reasons to delist. Colin is "carpet bombing the discussion", yes. Once again. Boothsift feels attacked, and my impression is the same, absolutely. Colin wants to change the rules and imposes his view to everyone. Because there's no consensus now on the side discussion, this user chooses the disrupting way, polluting a fair candidate and targeting a honest nominator. Now everyone is wasting time. Scandalous -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:17, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Clear delist Very awkward composition. Strange angle. Uninteresting image : boring subject. Cut flowers. Ugly right side. Looks cluttered. Harsh contrasts. Certainly a mistake from the past. Great to see this nomination here. Good find -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:17, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist per A. Savin. We can and probably should discuss the merits/advisability of these housecleaning campaigns, and maybe it's time to have a separate review page, but again that's not an issue within the scope of the instant discussion.

    As to the picture itself, let's all hold to the de novo standard we should be reviewing these by: if this was a first-time nomination, would it pass? And for me this would be a pretty quick oppose. Even taking into consideration that a picture like this that has not been focus-stacked is going to have a largely unsharp background, as a pure composition my response is not "Wow!" It's "so what?" Daniel Case (talk) 17:47, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Delist per Basile. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:48, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 9 delist, 2 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --A.Savin 20:31, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:2018 Niederwalddenkmal symmetric ks01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Aug 2019 at 22:08:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Boothsift 01:26, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Monuments_and_memorials

File:Basilica of Saint Clotilde Interior, Paris, France - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 16:12:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The interior of the Basilica of Saint Clotilde in Paris, France.
Suggestion for Set-nomination by Paris 16

Please note, if you comment on this, do not use the vote templates since they will be counted in the normal nom.

  •  Suggestion Set nom name: Interior of Basilique Sainte-Clotilde de Paris
Files included:
  • {{Support}} Maybe a set is a better choice--Paris 16 (talk) 17:18, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{n}} Perhaps, but I'm not sure. The previous church-interior sets I've seen have been strict and complete in scope, such as the York Minster set or the Hereford Cathedral set. In both those examples, the set was a pair of views of the nave of the church in opposite directions, which is a complete scope for a set. But in this case we have the nave along with the sanctuary, and I'm not sure that makes a complete set. Why, for example, include the sanctuary and not the choir, or the organ, or the lady chapel? The answer is because Diliff didn't choose to take those pictures, but it means that the set is less a set and more 'images of this church that we happen to have.' I'm also not convinced the sanctuary image is as good as the other one because of the distortion of the lamps, although it is still FP to me. So I think I will reserve judgment on whether a set is a good idea here. Cmao20 (talk) 17:33, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info @Cmao20 and Paris 16: You two need to figure out how you want this: File or Set. If 'Set', you need to withdraw this nom and start a Set-nom. A set can't be an "Alt" on a normal nom; the code, procedure and Bot-things are designed differently for these two options. Please, have a think and make the right kind of nom to save us from the mess that will otherwise follow. Thanks, --Cart (talk) 18:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @W.carter: , as I said above, the set is not an idea I'm especially keen on and I don't think I shall withdraw this nomination and renominate as a set. How should I sort this out so that the nomination looks like it did when I set it up? Cmao20 (talk) 18:10, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cmao20, since it is your nom, you are in charge of it, and since you ask me, I will fix it so that it can continue as a normal nom. Paris 16 should have asked you if it was ok to add an "Alt" before doing this. This is mendable, but please keep in mind to always ask first, it is good manners and it makes for less cleaning up. :-) --Cart (talk) 18:22, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:16, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Centre de données massives ULaval 02.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 21:17:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Data center of Université Laval
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Boothsift 05:48, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Camelus bactrianus in western Mongolia 06.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 12:10:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:06, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla

File:Gentle grip of a baby Toque macaque under its mother's care.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2019 at 07:13:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Baby Toque macaque's hand
There was no misunderstanding. Charles (talk) 19:05, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:05, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:Amrum - Weg durch die Dünen zum Strand bei Nebel.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 16:35:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Way trough the dunes of Amrum
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Germany

File:Lower Antelope Canyon November 2018 017.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 16:24:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States

File:Ophrys insectifera - Niitvälja2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 14:50:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ophrys insectifera
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales

File:Stazione ferroviaria di Riomaggiore1.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 14:01:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Riomaggiore railway station.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chloris chloris (profile).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 05:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Greenfinch (Chloris chloris) sitting on a branch.
  • I don't think that's the correct procedure, as the images are too dissimilar. I think treating them seperately is better; vote on this one and then setting up a delist vote on the other one.--Peulle (talk) 17:17, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Charles, Cmao20, you are confusing Commons for Wikipedia. Commons "delist-and-replace" is really just for artworks or a reprocessing of a previous photo. The rules say: "it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images". -- Colin (talk) 20:55, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • You may be right, but I don't think you've read the guidelines carefully enough Colin. That's not how I read the guidelines. They say "for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote... Delist and Replace is one of the two options. Charles (talk) 22:53, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Charles read it again. The two sections are on "delist" (the controversial and until recently rarely used practice of demoting an image in isolation) and "delist and replace" (the routine practice of replacing an FP of an artwork or where a photograph has been reprocessed). For each of the two sections, the paragraph ends with "For these, vote:" or "For these nominations, vote:" to indicate which voting templates are valid. The "these" in the second paragraph is clearly referring to valid "delist and replace nominations". It would make no sense for it to refer to nominations where delist and replace "is not intended". Above you only quote part of the text. The full text includes the valid cases for such a nomination. So the TL;DR is that we don't ever do delist and replace just because someone has taken a better picture of a certain bird. -- Colin (talk) 21:06, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Boothsift 06:23, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Golden gate of Ueno Tōshō-gū Shinto shrine, Tokyo, Japan.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 00:13:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden gate of Ueno Tōshō-gū Shinto shrine, Tokyo, Japan
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:26, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Hvannhagi 9.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 08:46:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hvannhagi, Suðuroy, Faroe Islands.
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:35, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Sunrise Point Bryce Canyon November 2018 002.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 06:13:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunrise Point, Bryce Canyon
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:34, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States

File:Hayden Valley Yellowstone River 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2019 at 22:23:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 03:55, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019 - НПП Подільські Товтри - 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 18:32:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Podilski Tovtry National Nature Park
  •  Weak oppose after a second look. The blurry background is not that interesting, and there are some strange line-shaped artefacts in the centre of the picture. I've put a note about them. I thought they were ripples in the water at first, but they seem too linear for that. I'm also fairly sure this has been downsized as the Canon 5D Mark II can produce 21 mpx images and this is only around 60% that size. Cmao20 (talk) 15:37, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:04, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chevy Bel Air in the Presidio of San Francisco.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2019 at 02:28:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1957 Chevrolet Bel Air in the Presidio of San Francisco
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 08:57, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Automobiles

File:Maniniaro - Angelus Peak, Nelson Lakes National Park, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2019 at 07:09:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Maniniaro - Angelus Peak, Nelson Lakes National Park, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:30, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand

File:San Francisco Peaks - Bonito Park.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2019 at 12:34:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The San Francisco Peaks seen from the Bonito Park, Arizona, USA
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:31, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sheep lounging in the shade of a tree with matriarch standing guard.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2019 at 08:30:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sheep lounging in the shade of a tree with matriarch standing guard
  • Yeah, I got off two shots of this scene to get the flock sharp, but then she moved too much and I couldn't get a third with the focus on her to stack with. Ah well, she did a great job with her flock and I think the sharpness is good enough for a whole flock of sheep. --Cart (talk) 11:15, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is a light-hearted way of describing the situation as it unfolded. She was clearly "top dog" in this group, they moved when she moved, came when she called, she kept tabs on me and so on. Some non-scientist use of language is allowed in a file title if it helps describe a photo. --Cart (talk) 13:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:33, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)

File:FCAB GT22CU 2401, GT22CU 2501 and Clyde GL26C 2005 crossing Salar de Carcote.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2019 at 21:52:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

FCAB train crossing Salar de Carcote
Confirmed results:
Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 05:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:Grapes, Dry Creek Valley-7705.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2019 at 14:06:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Veraison (the onset of ripening) of Zinfandel grapes in Dry Creek Valley, Sonoma County, California
  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_and_raw_vegetables
  •  Info Veraison (the onset of ripening) of Zinfandel grapes in Dry Creek Valley, Sonoma County, California. Veraison represents the transition from berry growth to berry ripening. During veraison, the berries change their color and soften, sugars and volume increase, and acidity decreases. Not all berries show veraison at the same time. Those exposed to warmer microclimate and mild water stress undergo veraison first. c/u/n by Frank Schulenburg.
Sounds like it could also be how the grapes make phone calls and get online (but that is the wrong coast). Daniel Case (talk) 21:27, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 05:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_and_raw_vegetables

File:L'execution de Maximilien de Robespierre a la guillotine.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2019 at 04:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 05:46, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Taxus uitgezaaid in een knotwilg. 28-07-2019. (d.j.b). 08.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Aug 2019 at 15:14:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
*Answer: We just let the yew grow on the pollard willow. Eventually the yew will probably not survive as a parasite on the willow tree, because it is too high.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:14, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 05:45, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Mengerschwamm without main light light strength 0,65 8K.png, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 09:46:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • @Chianti: Since there is a whole category on Commons for these Menger sponges and articles about them in 29 languages, you can't possibly say this is out of scope. This is one of the more interesting versions of these images and it can surely be used somewhere. Please remember that Commons and FPC are not Wikipedia. Read the rules more carefully, especially #7: "7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project." --Cart (talk) 16:02, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media/Computer-generated

File:Garden Lizard (গিরগিটি).jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 10:18:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Oriental garden lizard (Calotes versicolor)
  • You mean in the sense that the image may have been made through somewhat unethical practices? Certainly possible and perhaps another reason to be cautious of this one, although IMO we should give the creator the benefit of the doubt. Cmao20 (talk) 16:26, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Didn't know that. I guess I was imagining the animal might hurt itself on the sharp bits of the wire. You know much more about this kind of photography, so I have struck that part of my comment. Cmao20 (talk) 17:41, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
"I really would like to see some more tail" You dirty old man! Daniel Case (talk) 03:56, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Charles you voted twice -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:44, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 15:16, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bogolyubovo asv2019-01 img02 Intercession Church.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 14:11:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Intercession Church on the Nerl
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Vulphere 18:43, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Balcones de la Avenida Maritima - Santa Cruz de La Palma 14.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 05:09:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Balcones de la Avenida Maritima, 40 - 46 Avenida Maritima, Santa Cruz de La Palma
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:17, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Morning fog in Upper Silesia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2019 at 10:39:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:17, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Natural phenomena

File:Havana - Cuba - 0116.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 17:29:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 15:28, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bamberg-Bug Regintz Kormoran 121710.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 21:58:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cormorant on a branch above the Regnitz in Bamberg Bug
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:03, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Order_:_Suliformes

File:Catedral de Gniezno, Gniezno, Polonia, 2014-09-17, DD 25-27 HDR.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 22:30:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Coffin of Adalbert of Prague (956-997), Gniezno Cathedral, Gniezno, Poland.
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:04, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Papou 5204a.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 11:22:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Vulphere 12:51, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait

File:Parque estatal Chugach, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 52.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 22:39:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial view of a glacier in Chugach State Park, Alaska, United States.
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:05, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Torii path with lantern at Fushimi Inari Taisha Shrine, Kyoto, Japan.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 00:39:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Torii path with lantern at Fushimi Inari Taisha Shrine, Kyoto, Japan
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 06:12, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Japan

File:190807 HK laser pen protest Incendo 05.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 12:28:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

In a police press conference in the afternoon, police representatives stated that the laser pointers he purchased were in fact "laser guns." They attempted to demonstrate the "laser gun" Fong purchased is able to burn a hole in a paper by pointing it to a black area of a newspaper and holding it steadily for 20 seconds at very short distance. At night, hundreds gathered at Hong Kong Space Museum with their laser pointers in protest of selective legal enforcement and the arrest of HKBU student union president Keith Fong. Protesters responded by pointing all their laser pointer to the newspaper held, mocking the police's demonstration.


  • Category: Commons:Featured pictures/People
  •  Info Description: The Hong Kong police arrested a university student union president for "possession of offensive weapon", but it is simply a laser pointer pen. Police said it is in fact a "laser gun" and demonstrated that it could burn a hole in a newspaper by pointing it to a black area of a newspaper and holding it steadily for 20 seconds at very short distance. Protesters gathered at the Space Museum and used their own laser pen to recreate the demonstration to mock the police, and to show their anger at the selective prosecution during the anti-extradition bill protest to spread white terror (see Wikipedia for more) Photo created by Studio Incendo @ Flickr - uploaded by Wefk423 - nominated by Wefk423 -- Wefk423 (talk) 12:28, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Wefk423 (talk) 12:28, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment @Wefk423: Please put new nominations on the top of the page,not the bottom. Featured Pictures has a different procedure than valued images. Thank you--Boothsift 17:45, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak oppose Perhaps an important image of the protests in Hong Kong, and a dramatic photo, but not of the highest technical quality. For me, if this becomes seen as an iconic image of these events, it might be worth featuring, but not otherwise. Cmao20 (talk) 19:36, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I'm waiting for the "needs vertical perspective correction" oppose vote :-). The general consensus with such images has been that we should give them time before nominating at FPC. We have had many photos protests or supporters wrt some recent world event and they are hard to judge while emotions are still fresh. If in a year's time, say, we think this is a great image of this event, then we can judge better. Wrt quality, "tank man" is a crap photo judged by modern DSLR standards, but one of the most influential photos of all time, and with a great story behind it being taken and published. I would suggest you withdraw and put to the side for now. -- Colin (talk) 21:21, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Does have the potential to become an iconic photo (it looks like a scene from an anime or movie where the protagonist gets his superpowers on) but it isn't now, and the technical quality is seriously wanting. Daniel Case (talk) 15:21, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Not really iconic at this moment to compensate for the technical shortcomings. Smartphone cameras have come a long way, but we're still far from the point where they can produce FPs outside of daylight conditions. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:26, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Technical shortcoming.--Vulphere 11:30, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per others--Boothsift 05:40, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:28, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boundary Creek, Canterbury, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 05:07:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:27, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Hoehlenplanarie-dendrocoelum-cavaticum.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 05:41:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Dendrocoelum cavaticum in a spring
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:27, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals

File:Spitzkoppe Rock Arch Panorama.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 08:19:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The "Rock Arch" granite formation with the Spitzkoppe in the background, Namibia
 Comment The rock arch was relatively close (maybe 20 metres off), so there's some distortion due to perspective. --Domob (talk) 16:02, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak support It's a lovely landscape and very high-resolution, but I'm a little bit bothered about how the sky seems to change colour, from a deeper blue on the left to a light blue on the right. Cmao20 (talk) 14:03, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
That's unfortunately true (because the right edge of the image is close to where the sun was). If you think it is useful, I can try to make the sky more even in post processing? (But maybe it just looks artificial then.) --Domob (talk) 16:03, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, I understand the difficulty of getting a uniform sky when shooting closer to the sun. Nevertheless, personally I'd give it a go at making it more even. Cmao20 (talk) 16:35, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I've provided an alternate version where the sky is modified to be more even. --Domob (talk) 14:54, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Alternate[edit]

The "Rock Arch" granite formation with the Spitzkoppe in the background, Namibia
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:25, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:2011-06-04 Kjeungskjær Lighthouse (The Red Sailor), Sør-Trøndelag, Norway.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 17:25:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kjeungskjær Lighthouse (The Red Sailor), Norway
  •  Support per above. It is unusual to see the sun glints in a whole photo, mostly it is just a partial, and that's what makes this photo unique and wow-y. --Cart (talk) 11:58, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support per above. Definitely an interesting capture. Cmao20 (talk) 12:41, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose: per Peulle --СССР (talk) 14:39, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support per Cmao20 and Cart. --Aristeas (talk) 17:18, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment The ship I was on had been going through rain and mild storm all morning. When we reached this point on the coast, the sun, overhead and slightly in front, started to push through the gloom a little. The light conditions are what was there at the time.The result was a desaturated scene but having a full tone curve and detail in both highlights and shadows. The Red Sailor is still red.
  • All natural forms in the image like the rocks are rounded and smoothed. Only human-made forms like the lighthouse and jetty show vertical lines. This draws the viewer to other disparate elements. There is a boat at the end of the jetty (attached? drifting?). Why are people walking briskly along the jetty? Why is there a person lying on the jetty by the door? At the top of the lighthouse are more people but why are they looking out in a different direction?
  • What makes this image different from most is that it strongly invites the viewer to construct their own narrative about what is going on in the scene. The muted colors support that interaction.
  • Have fun thinking about this one. More votes, please. --GRDN711 (talk) 18:22, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's nice to hear someone with these kind of thoughts about a photo. Usually, the only questions we read here are: Is it sufficiently denoised? Does it have the proper license and categories? Why that f-number? Why are the islands cut? And. So. On. This is how you should really view a photo. Refreshing. --Cart (talk) 19:27, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There were usually water tanks in the lighthouses when they were continuously manned, ships came with water and supplies. Some of them also had means to collect rain water. Lighthouses are sort of built along the same principles as boats. :) --Cart (talk) 20:31, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Except lighthouses can't get out of a boat's way. Daniel Case (talk) 01:48, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
True. Lighthouse vs Boat: 1-0 :-) --Cart (talk) 09:12, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose per Peulle. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:49, 12 August 2019 (UTC) You voted twice. --Milseburg (talk) 12:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:2019-02-15 074 Roseate spoonbill (Platalea ajaja) at Sian Ka'an Biosphere Reserve, Mexico.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 18:58:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Roseate spoonbill (Platalea ajaja), Mexico
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:53, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Golden-eyed tree frog (Agalychnis annae) 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 19:49:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Golden-eyed tree frog (Agalychnis annae) in profile
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:54, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians

File:Longines 4 Grand Prix pocket watch - clockwork visible - enhanced resolution DSF3402-PSMS.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 15:52:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Longines pocket watch
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:54, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Sleeping, homeless children - Jacob Riis.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2019 at 11:17:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sleeping, homeless children
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:05, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical

File:Bamberg Hain Stockschwämmchen Kuehneromyces mutabilis stack.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 20:35:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Stock sponge at a beech tree in a park in Bamberg
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:45, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi

File:Glödnitz Kleinglödnitz Fußbrücke über Glödnitzbach und Stallgebäude O-Ansicht 04082019 6905.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2019 at 16:15:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Barn in Kleinglödnitz, Austria
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture

File:Mandrilperspective6.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 06:37:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Skull of a Mandrill (Mandrillus sphynx)
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:57, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Bones, shells and fossils

File:Papilio machaon - Daucus carota - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 06:23:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Papilio machaon
Confirmed results:
Result: 34 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 14:01, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Hagia Sophia Mars 2013.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Aug 2019 at 15:53:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hagia Sophia
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:27, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Mono Lake South Tufa September 2016 panorama.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 19:11:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panoramic view of South Tufa, Mono Lake
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:26, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States

File:Turtles Basking.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2019 at 23:57:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A group of Big Bend Slider Turtles basking on a fallen tree over water
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Sorry but the vignette means this is unlikely to be acceptable for FP. -- Colin (talk) 12:59, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Fritz Quant Römerbrücke.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 08:08:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Etching by Fritz Quant: Roman Bridge in Trier, (before 1921).
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:25, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Kakteen IMG 4213.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Aug 2019 at 08:08:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cactus flower
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 18:24, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:AndrewMercerIMG 5585 Australian Water Dragon.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 15:34:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 21:34, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles

File:Inverness Cathedral Nave 1, Scotland, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 19:41:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Inverness Cathedral's nave looking south towards the choir and altar in Scotland, UK.
  • Just a note: I will understand if anyone opposes because of the slight motion blur on the flag at the right-hand side, but please consider that such motion blur is difficult to avoid given the necessity of a long exposure. Cmao20 (talk) 19:44, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 21:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings

File:Senator George P. Wetmore of Rhode Island in a Krieger electric automobile.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 17:38:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Senator George P. Wetmore of Rhode Island in a Krieger electric automobile
  • Ikan, no, this is not a proper delist and replace. Unfortunately, it's not the first time Adam tries to use these home-made "delist and replace" nominations. Not so long ago, we had to have a small campaign to actually delist the photos he thought he had replaced. I would urge Adam to please use the proper procedure for this kind of nominations. The best thing would be to withdraw this nomination and start a proper delist and replace nom, but failing that, the old photo needs to be nominated for delisting as soon as this nom is over. Not an efficient way to have to make two noms instead of just a normal one. --Cart (talk) 20:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • @W.carter: Check your history. Delist and replace procedures did not exist for the things you're complaining about. The whole procedure is relatively recent on commons. I noticed the replacement for this was featured after voting had started. Calm down, please. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:14, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • What a weird coincidence, I mentioned this file very recently on the FP talk page, where Delisting was exactly the subject, and my comment literally "Please never delist :-)" I know this is not a real delist and just a better version, but really what a surprising nomination coming now in those circumstances -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 21:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Automobiles

File:Southshore Spit Reserve, Christchurch, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 20:54:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Southshore Spit Reserve, Christchurch, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 21:33, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand

File:2017.07.13.-04-Selchow-Storkow (Mark)--entwurzelter Baum-Wurzel.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 20:06:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

uprooted tree - root
  •  Comment Sometimes the sky is very bright and garish. And the clouds don't have high contrasts. But what I don't understand at all is, what you mean with A lot of discordant shapes, ...? Every shape shows the reality. However,  I withdraw my nomination. Others will not have a different opinion anyway. --Hockei (talk) 05:07, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Daslook (Allium ursinum) d.j.b 07.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2019 at 15:13:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Daslook (Allium ursinum)
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:19, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae

File:Pyrrhura perlata - Karlsruhe Zoo 03.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2019 at 07:04:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Crimson-bellied parakeet, Pyrrhura perlata, Karlsruhe Zoo
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:21, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds

File:Moscow Metro Dobryninskaya asv2018-09.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2019 at 21:12:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Dobryninskaya Metro Station
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:09, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Russia

File:Water reflection of Kinkaku-ji Temple a sunny day, Kyoto, Japan.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2019 at 01:58:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Water reflection of Kinkaku-ji Temple a sunny day, Kyoto, Japan


  • Please Chianti, add your notes on the nomination page, not on the original file page, where they're displayed everywhere outside this section, Wikipedia included. I've moved it for you. Thanks for your suggestion. However the result is not very well balanced in my view, particularly the building, which I prefer here in the middle. I may crop the water a little bit more, at the bottom and at the right, keeping the 16:9 ratio, but I don't think that will change that much -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment thank you very much for smoothing out my mistake, sorry for that. I'm only expressing my opinion from my first impressions – if you prefer it in the middle which is a valid reason from a composition standpoint, leave it like it is.--Chianti (talk) 10:25, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 09:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Japan

File:Chur in Graubünden (Zwitserland) 41.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Aug 2019 at 15:16:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 7 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:12, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hakatere River valley, Canterbury, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2019 at 20:44:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hakatere River valley, Canterbury, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:14, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand

File:A 95 year old woman with her pet rooster, Havana, Cuba.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2019 at 17:57:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Tomer T, the "rename the file after the nomination" is because a rename during a nom will mess with the codes if the nom is successful. I've put this on my watchlist so I'll fix things after the closing. --Cart (talk) 08:39, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tomer T, well technically yes. If you move the file name, you have to move the nom-page too to the same new name and see to it that all the names are fixed in the top part of the nom and put a speedy-delete on the old redundant nom page. If you are not sure what you are doing, mistakes can make things worse. If you rename a file after the nom is closed, the redirects will sort things out nicely. Just leave it be for now and I'll fix it later. --Cart (talk) 08:48, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:11, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People

File:Impatiens pallida.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 02:28:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pale jewelweed (Impatiens pallida) blooming at the rare Charitable Research Reserve, Ontario, Canada.
These flowers hang from the stalks, cutting it is unavoidable. --СССР (talk) 05:31, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Support, then -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:00, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Not that I'm totally against brightening it, but why do you think so? It was taken with a flash from what was very close to the lens' minimum focusing distance of 0.28m, which, I think, provided for more than adequate illumination. The background is dark because the plant grows on the floor of the forest with a very thick canopy. СССР (talk) 15:03, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Out of curiosity, how do you not find the multiple shadows that are actually on the subject distracting here? --СССР (talk) 16:51, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's cropped; the flower is only a couple of cm is size, and I couldn't get any closer to focus. --СССР (talk) 14:21, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:41, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Order_:_Ericales

File:Interior of the Tokyo International Forum Glass Building, Japan.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 02:13:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Interior of the Tokyo International Forum Glass Building, Japan
  • Pixel peeping? There's almost no sharpening here. It was shot @100 ISO with an excellent lens, then sharp from the beginning. No need to increase anything. A stitched panorama would have certainly given the same result, but with the risk of potential stitching errors. This ultra wide rectilinear lens is very adapted in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:18, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  strong oppose The problem here is that the light is awful (and the noise Kreuzschnabel sees when pixel peeping is caused by lifting the shadows to try to lighten the dull interior). We're supposed to be selecting the finest on Commons, so compare with two other photographs on Commons of this building: File:Tokyo International Forum Glass Building 1.jpg and File:Tokyo International Forum Glass Building 3.jpg. Both are high resolution though have pixel-peeping issues. But wow, the lighting in those photographs is amazing. Rather than dull shade colours as though the building had solid walls and roof and some tiny windows, we have bright sunlight colours, with a multitude of patches of light through the glass atrium. This nomination is a long way short, photographically, from those images. -- Colin (talk) 09:29, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
discussion
  • I don't think "authentic blue sky" or "mild post-treatment" are feature-worthy attributes. Nearly the entire interior is in dull shade. For a glass atrium this is particularly unfortunate. The quality of the other two photos is just fine, except for pixel-peepers. They would both print A4 to high quality and and make spectacular covers for an architecture journal. This photo, regardless of the quality of its pixels, would be rejected. -- Colin (talk) 13:58, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry but if you call this a picture with bad lighting you should take basic classes in composition and buy your first architectural magazine. You should take a look at the image as a whole and its distribution of lights and shadows and the constrast and balance of the lighter and darker parts. The photos you linked to don't come even close to this one, they are like candy coloured exstasy trips with few overall contrast and almost flat lighting. Some like this style, and it's merely a matter of taste but not of quality. You obiously don't like the pic and that's okay, but you should say the truth. To call it bad instead is a terrible misjudgment.--Chianti (talk) 23:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
dispensable contents
  • Chianti, word of advice about your recent votes/comments. As a photographer, you'll earn respect for your opinions on lighting and composition by taking, uploading and nominating great photos that are fantastic examples of such. And some Commoners, such as Yann, do so by repeatedly successfully nominating images by others. Lecturing experienced photographers as though they'd only just picked up a camera and are working out where the "on" switch is, or experienced Commoners as though they hadn't successfully nominated hundreds and reviewed thousands of FPs already, is going to piss off everyone real fast. Btw, lighting and composition are separate topics, with their own classes and books (of which I have many). If you look, you will see that the alternative image I think is better, has pretty much the same composition (it is clearly an obvious decent spot from which to take a photo). The difference is purely the quality of light. There is a reason why "dull" in English means both poor light and unexciting. This building can look great when lit well, and this is bad lighting. -- Colin (talk) 16:07, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • ✘[No] Colin has "a very bad habit of attacking people in a decent speech", Yann said recently, and this opinion is shared by many of us. Only 2 weeks ago another user felt attacked by the same. And immediately after there have been more disrupting comments on the FP talk page, on the same register. Now saying Chianti "is going to piss off everyone real fast" is not only hostile but above all extremely impolite. Enough! There's a policy, here: Civility - which should be respected, especially by experimented users. These kind of rude reviews are really too unpleasant. I don't really care about the strong oppose Colin gives for weak reasons, so often I receive sterile reviews by him like here and there, better to ignore. But attacking that way another user is pure disruption. Stop! -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:38, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Basile Morin could you take your grudge elsewhere. I find it a concerning that you're digging up links from fr-wp, which is a bit stalkerish. To be honest, I don't think Yann would want that episode resurfaced, because it didn't end well for him, and I've put it behind me and above I'm actually defending Yann from comments on another FPC by Chianti which are just as rude as the ones here. I think we can all see who is uncivil here (and btw, Wikipedia policies do not apply on Commons). If you have a specific complained about a specific thing I have said today, then comment on that. But this sort of mudslinging and digging out reviews from a year ago to try to rubbish my review, is a personal attack. I opposed your dull photo. Grow some balls and deal with it. -- 23:17, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How very Fake News Donald "I'm the least sexist/racist person in the whole world" Trump-like to have you cite NPA after making a clear personal attack on me, and a creepy one where you clearly have researched the rest of Wikimedia to find dirt on me, and found one from four months ago on French Wikipedia. Basile, what you are doing is just one personal attack after another. I get you are upset I opposed your photo. Please stick to telling us how wonderful it is. You will note that in my disagreement with Chianti, I am focusing on his comments here (and another related comment to Yann on an FPC on this page) which are quite unacceptable, and have not made any personal attack on him nor dug into his history to find something else bad about him. Only you have done this. Don't do that. -- Colin (talk) 07:43, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
The events of that DR did not turn out the way you claim. Look at the image history now. The green tinted photo is history. And it was Yann, not me, who got admonished over their behaviour at that DR. He got very upset about his image going to DR, just as you are upset about an oppose vote. That wasn't typical behaviour for Yann, and we have both moved on since then. You really have no right to dig about in people's past, and unpick other people's old forgotten disputes, unrelated to a FP nomination, simply so you can find a handy insult to fling at me. By repeatedly raising off-topic (and off-Commons) issues for the purpose of provoking me, you are clearly now just trolling. Unwatching. -- Colin (talk) 12:54, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:07, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support.--Vulphere 11:30, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral per Colin. I'm really sorry, Basile, it seems like I've been less than supportive of a lot of your photos recently, and I don't much like doing so as they are always of very high quality. The vast majority of your nominations here are FP to me, and I don't agree about the sharpening/denoising artefacts either. But I do think that a glass atrium is supposed to be bright and airy, and a dull light really doesn't suit it. Honestly, I don't think the quality of the two pictures Colin suggests are at all bad given their high resolution, and I would probably support either for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 19:56, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • For me this soft light shows well the interior design and highlights the colossal structure of the roof. I also like the beautiful sky through the glass and the window blinds being lit by the sun -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • ... and you are right. Great composition and distribution of the lighter and darker parts, also very natural colours with a nice contrast between the yellowish blinds and the blue sky and blueish interior.--Chianti (talk) 23:15, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:42, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Acker-Winde IMG 2708.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2019 at 17:26:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Acker-winds

File:Weizen IMG 2713.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2019 at 17:10:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Wheat before the grain harvest

File:Senfweißling auf Pusteblume.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 06:15:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Leptidea sinapis
Franz van Duns the missing EXIF might be due to whatever software was last used to save the image. Some of the more basic programs just discard it. Alternatively, I think Photoshops "Save for the web" also discards it due to an 1990's mindset about saving a few bytes. You could ask the photographer what they used. Btw, Megapixels (MP) isn't the same as MBit (which is just filesize and depends on compression used). Filling the frame with an insect requires good kit and good technique and an awful lot of patience for failure. -- Colin (talk) 20:37, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Colin Thank you for your answer and your quick reply. It seems that the vast majority of contributors uses software that does pass on the EXIF data, more or less unchanged. Opps, I admit I was slightly distracted when I typed "MBit", when "MPixel" was what I actually meant. By the way, each one of my RAW files is approximately 85 MBytes (680 MBit) in size before being processed to the final JPG image. And yes, I also agree that much, much patience is the requisite element contributing to that singular image that stands out against dozens, or even hundreds, of technically perfect, but simply less outstanding images.
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 14:38, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera

File:Louisa May Alcott, c. 1870 - Warren's Portraits, Boston.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2019 at 19:32:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Louisa May Alcott
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women

File:Vincent van Gogh - Self-Portrait - Google Art Project (454045).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 03:44:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Self portrait of the Dutch painter Vincent van Gogh
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:25, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic media

File:Zitronenfalter ♂ Gonepteryx rhamni 4.JPG (delist)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 04:29:39
SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination Thank you for the reviews--Boothsift 17:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC) Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2019-07-20-Dingle Lightgouse-0673.jpg[reply]

File:ETH Zürich im Abendlicht.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 03:35:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"ETH Library is the largest public scientific and technical library in Switzerland. It serves as a central university library for ETH Zurich and a national centre for scientific and technical information."
  •  Weak oppose Sorry but the more I think about this one, it's not at the level of an FP night shot for me. The composition is not especially appealing, although I'm sure the image is very valuable and useful. Cmao20 (talk) 14:18, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak support per Cmao; without metadata I can't be sure if this was the best possible shot, i.e. it looks like it might have been a long exposure but I can't tell for sure. Daniel Case (talk) 18:03, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Cmao--Boothsift 23:26, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose The dark trees of the foreground make the composition cluttered. The quality is not exceptional, with these buildings at the distance lacking sharpness. Blown highlights through the windows of the main building are not really successful, it would have been more interesting to make the interior visible, with HDR for example -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:58, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - I generally agree with Basile's points. I also am not so impressed with the quality and amount of noise, compared to some other blue hour photos we've featured. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:54, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination --Pine (✉) 00:46, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common brimstone (Gonepteryx rhamni) male underside Italy.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2019 at 16:43:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Common brimstone (Gonepteryx rhamni) male on red valerian (Centranthus ruber), Paestum, Italy

 I withdraw my nomination OK, I hear you. Thanks for all the contributions. Charles (talk) 16:46, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Panthera tigris, 2017 (cropped).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 16:52:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Panthera tigris, 2017
  • Well, a white tiger is a type of Bengal tiger, simply a variant caused by a lack of a particular pigment. Honestly, I can't tell the difference between most of the tiger subspecies, but it's worth noting that the Bengal tiger is significantly more common than the Siberian tiger (although, of course, both are endangered). If we have an excellent-quality shot of the Siberian tiger such as A. Savin has provided us with, then IMO we should be able to do at least as well for the Bengal tiger. The only subspecies for which I'd drop the quality requirements would be one of the really rare ones like the South China tiger, since that would be a more unique shot; but even then, there are several individuals in captivity. So, on the whole, I think we should wait until a better photo of this kind comes along rather than just promoting the best one we already have. Cmao20 (talk) 20:55, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination I asked the author if he could make a version with less noise. Regards, Yann (talk) 05:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cleopatra (Gonepteryx cleopatra italica) male underside Italy.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 07:21:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cleopatra butterfly (Gonepteryx cleopatra italica) male on red valerian (Centranthus ruber), Paestum, in Italy

 I withdraw my nomination Sorry, Cleo. Charles (talk) 09:29, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common tern at Brooklyn Bridge Park (21040).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 20:07:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Common tern at Brooklyn Bridge Park
  • There's not much from the above criticisms that I can fix. Only the halo that KoH mentioned, I think, and I don't think that would be enough to change anyone's mind, really. I appreciate the nomination, but it just doesn't seem like this one's going to fly, so to speak. :) — Rhododendrites talk |  18:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination Per Rhododendrites, thank everyone for the reviews--Boothsift 22:23, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Chalet du Mont-Royal panorama.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2019 at 05:17:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Mount Royal Chalet, Montréal.
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:34, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Solitär in der Hamburger HafenCity.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 06:04:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Solitär in der Hamburger HafenCity
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:35, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture#Germany

File:Sumba sheeps 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2019 at 06:43:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Faroe sheep near the town of Sumba.
Sure they're not sheeps off the old block? Daniel Case (talk) 21:29, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I don't care what kind of photography this is, Basile Morin, to me that's a flaw here and there --Poco2 19:42, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Need to ping me for this? -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:36, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla

File:Volcán de Ollagüe, Bolivia, 2016-02-03, DD 80-88 PAN.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 11:10:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Volcanic landscape featuring from left to right Tomasamil, Cañapa, Ollagüe and Aucanquilcha, Andes, southern Bolvia/northern Chile.
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Cart (talk) 13:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural

File:Winter auf der Abtsrodaer Kuppe.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 12:15:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Winter in the Rhoen Montains, Hesse, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:39, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany

File:Lake Benmore with surrounding hills, New Zealand 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 21:05:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lake Benmore with surrounding hills, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:16, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand

File:Schwalbenschwanz (Papilio machaon).jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 13:03:24
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  •  Info It's a very soft image with too much out of focus. Please compare with nomination below. (Original nomination)
  •  Delist -- Charles (talk) 13:03, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment The rules are clear. Delist "is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images". Charles is attempting an illegal "delist and replace" over three nominations (and only two active nominations are permitted and Charles currently has four). -- Colin (talk) 13:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Our interpretations of the rules differs. I believe I am entitled to nominate any image for delisting. The community may disagree. And the rules state "There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations." So can I ask someone else to check out Colin's actions, please. I may be wrong. Charles (talk) 14:17, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Colin, Charles has the right to nominate two delists in addition to his normal noms (at the moment only one AFAICS, the other one is withdrawn). It is up to the community to decide if they should be delisted though. I've altered your FPX to a comment. Feel free to revert if you don't agree. --Cart (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See other nom. I retain the view that this is clearly an invalid "delist and replace" spread over three nominations. This isn't what we do on Commons. -- Colin (talk) 14:35, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Charles, I made a mistake and you have not been inconvenienced beyond pointing out the mistake. Demanding an apology in such circumstances is rather petty, considering you are the one here breaking the clear rules about delisting. An apology will therefore not be forthcoming. We all make mistakes. For example, Charles, when you notified the creator/nominators of these images, you did not link back to the delist nomination, which is required by the rules. There is even a template for doing the talk page notification. Perhaps you could fix that, out of courtesy to them. -- Colin (talk) 17:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am not breaking any rules. I posted a message on their talk pages before submitting the delist nomination. You accused me of "illegal" action which is somewhat more than being "inconvenienced". Charles (talk) 17:42, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep An FP is not only about technical quality, it is just as much (sometimes even more) about composition and ambience in the photo. The compo in this with the soft light and excellent balance is far superior to the current nom's passport photo style. It deserves to be kept beside the new photo, if its nomination succeeds. I don't think it's constructive to treat FPs like VIs and ask for delists as soon as a new photo of a subject is nominated. --Cart (talk) 14:54, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep portrait format and background colors differ -- Axel Tschentscher (talk) 16:12, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: This nomination is explicitly against the rules and not Commons practice. On Commons, if we take/find a better picture of a subject, we are just happy to nominate the new one. That's what everyone else does, Charles. We don't go around eliminating all the old ones, which have nothing wrong with them. That sort of delist-and-replace belongs on Wikipedia. -- Colin (talk) 17:11, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
  •  Comment Just pointing out that Colin is wrong again. When it comes to the reasons for setting up a delisting nomination, the rules are: Users may at any time create a delisting nomination of an image they believe is no longer good enough. I quote from the procedures: "Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture.". Therefore, if Charles feels this is no longer good enough, he may open a nomination to delist. Whether his opinion should be followed is then up to the voters. Disagreeing with someone about whether an image should retain FP status is fine, but the very fact that there is a delist procedure should tell you that FPs are not intended to stay such forever.--Peulle (talk) 07:30, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I second that Charles, or any other user, in principle can create delist noms if they wish, as the rules are at the moment. Also that it is up to the community to decide if the image should be deleted. However, the reasons for doing so during these latest delist noms by Charles are a bit murky. I don't think it's good practice (and a bit rude) to start delists while you have a nom of the same subject, but the rules are the same for everyone, so here we are. I think the best, and politest, thing to do would be for Charles to simply withdraw these delist noms, have a think about it, maybe discuss the delisting process on the FPC talk page and perhaps get back to these and/or other delists later. --Cart (talk) 07:54, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • This was delisted along with a nomination of what Charles considered a better photo. It wasn't delisted because somebody spotted it and went "OMG that is soooo bad, what were they thinking, we have loads of better ones now". This is a great photo. Charles reviewed the existing photos of the species when nominating his (as we should) but instead of just explaining why his new one should be promoted (as everyone else does) he decided to delist two perfectly fine images because "Please compare with nomination below" his is in his opinion better. So it is not an isolated delist (the rules of which you both agree with), but an obvious illegal delist-and-replace (per rules I quote above that forbid it). This photo got 16 solid supports and was speedy promoted only 6 years ago. The resolution is similar to what Charles offers us today (though Jee often offered much higher resolution when he was active here). The delist procedure was, until this summer of madness, a rare event. As I have said, if Charles wants "Delist the competition" to be a standard practice when nominating a new photo of a subject, can he please go get consensus for it and change the rules. -- Colin (talk) 08:01, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Cart and Charles, I agree that there needs to be a talk:FP discussion about this. However it is still holiday season. I think it would be better to wait till September, when more people are active and can participate in establishing consensus. -- Colin (talk) 08:09, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs)

Result: 1 delist, 2 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:39, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schwalbenschwanz, Papilio machaon.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 13:05:37
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  •  Info Very little is in focus and the compostion is not great. Please compare with nomination below. (Original nomination)
  •  Delist -- Charles (talk) 13:05, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment The rules are clear. Delist "is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images". Charles is attempting an illegal "delist and replace" over three nominations (and only two active nominations are permitted and Charles currently has four). -- Colin (talk) 13:39, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Our interpretations of the rules differs. I believe I am entitled to nominate any image for delisting. I have not done an illegal "delist and replace". The community may disagree. And the rules state "There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations." So can I ask someone else to check out Colin's actions, please. I may be wrong. Charles (talk) 14:25, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per my comment on the other/above delist nom, I've changed Colin's FPX to a cmt. Please revert if you don't agree. --Cart (talk) 14:26, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • OK if 2+2 is allowed. However, I retain the view that this is clearly an invalid "delist and replace" spread over three nominations. This isn't what we do on Commons. If Charles wants Commons FP to be a place where photographers take a new photo of something and then go around delisting all the previous "inferior" photos of that subject, then please go change the rules. Currently that is explicitly disallowed. -- Colin (talk) 14:36, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep An FP is not only about technical quality, it is just as much (sometimes even more) about composition. This photo brings out a three-dimensional aspect, something the other photos lack. Having multiple photos of a subject is not only within the rules, it is also very useful to see different aspects of the same thing. I'm only waiting for a blue hour or head on photo of this beautiful butterfly to add to the series. :-) I don't think it's constructive to treat FPs like VIs and ask for delists as soon as a new photo of a subject is nominated. --Cart (talk) 14:57, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep entirely different photo -- Axel Tschentscher (talk) 16:13, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: This nomination is explicitly against the rules and not Commons practice. On Commons, if we take/find a better picture of a subject, we are just happy to nominate the new one. That's what everyone else does, Charles. We don't go around eliminating all the old ones, which have nothing wrong with them. That sort of delist-and-replace belongs on Wikipedia. -- Colin (talk) 17:12, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
  • Boothsift exactly. Charles is a regular at WP FP so I think he confuses the separate purposes of the two projects. WP FP has one featured lead photo in an article, generally, so has to delist and replace it when a better one comes along. Whereas on Commons, we are just happy that someone has taken a new and perhaps better image: more images for people to enjoy and use. No need to go around pissing on the old ones. -- Colin (talk) 21:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I actually had no idea that there could only be one FP of each subject on WP, thanks for the info. So this is just some sort of confusion on Charles' part between the sites. I like Commons' way better, the more the merrier. :-) --Cart (talk) 22:13, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • There is no confusion on my part. I understand the different FP rules between Wikipedia and Commons. Unlike Colin and Cart. Wikipedia can and does have more than one FP in an article and frequently more than one FP of the same species. There are multiple FPs of lion, cheetah, elephant, siberian tiger, zebra, meerkat, olive baboon etc. Charles (talk) 23:01, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Looks like I should read the rules for WP:FP myself instead of relying on secondary info here to get this sorted out. --Cart (talk) 07:04, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I never said FP can only have one FP. I said "generally". Which is true for I guess probably over 90% of Wikipedia FPs (the very popular animals Charles lists will of course be more likely to have two great photos that could be used in an article). Where we have two photos offering the same "Passport identification" purposes then clearly WP only needs one in the lead and thus only one can be featured. If you want to replace a featured lead, you go through the delist-and-replace process. In fact, Charles's butterflies are a good example of multiple-WP-FP per article, where there may be male and female and mating photos. But other than that, Wikipedia isn't going to have two featured standard-composition female butterfly X's on a flower/rock. Wikipedia has the additional problem that FP's lose their status just because someone removes them from an article: there are three Zebra FPs but only two are in (separate) articles, so one of them will eventually be noticed and demoted. Charles is clearly trying to export the WP concept to Commons, and if he would look at how other people have handled multiple-FPs of a subject over the years, he will note that that isn't what is done here.
This photo got 16 solid support, so was speedy promoted only 5 years ago. It was taken with a Nikon D800E and quality macro lens, both of which are still a match for contemporary equipment (and indeed greatly exceed the quality most of us use). There's zero reason to demote it on Commons. -- Colin (talk) 07:44, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • Peulle, the rules are clear already and already limit what delist is for. Delist "is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images". This is exactly what Charles has done. "Please compare with nomination below" says it all. -- Colin (talk) 08:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination Well said. Charles (talk) 08:22, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Result: 1 delist, 2 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:34, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Under stars and snows.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 01:40:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The view of Machhapuchre from Annapurna base camp with fresh snow under moonlight and the trails of stars over it.

 I withdraw my nomination Thank everyone for the reviews!--Boothsift 17:55, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Daubeny's water-lily at BBG (43428).jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 22:36:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Daubeny's water-lily at Brooklyn Botanic Garden

 I withdraw my nomination Thank you for the notice--Boothsift 17:56, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Opinel N°10 Carbon w bread on wood.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Aug 2019 at 22:24:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

French Opinel pocket/folding knife with bread; showing the typical stains of a carbon steel blade
  •  Comment Thank you for your opinion. A technically perfect photo of these objects without blade reflection exists with File:Opinel-bread-01.jpg, but it lacks wow. The light-shadow distribution here is deliberately chosen to highlight the blade, the correct word is therefore not "distracting" but attracting the eye of the viewer. It is intended to be as "distracting" as the sheets in this image. In fact, this photo thoroughfully composed with larger dark parts in the top left and lighter parts in bottom right, with the smaller lighter spot on the bread crust bottom left and the darker spot top right for balance. The locking mechanism of the knive was placed in the middle of the diagonal of the latter two – a diagonal that puts the highlighted blade on the overall darker side of said diagonale and the darker part of the knive (the handle) in the overall lighter "half" of the picture. Even the shape of the bread was intentional to "reverse repeat" the blade point and curve. I hope this helped you to understand the idea of the image and why I chose it from many others of a series; also this was a short introduction to basic and classic principles of composition of Natures Mortes. There's some more like a dark "L" contrasting with a lighter "L" (as I would call it), feel free to ask if you want to know more. To make it more easy for you I made an annotated image here referring to my comments, which also may help you in the future when it comes to judging photos regarding composition. Regards, Chianti (talk) 09:29, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose According to Opinel's website this is an outdoor knife, suitable "to work difficult materials, trim branches". It would seem more appropriate, for cutting bread indoors, to use their bread knife which has serrations. While I appreciate your explanation of the care taken over the composition of the photo, ultimately the opinion of whether the photo works is in the eye of the beholder, and if Yann finds the reflection distracting, then you can't just argue that away. For non-obvious photographs, it is better to explain your work up-front than have to potentially defend it after being opposed/misunderstood. Still, one can't please everyone. I think the long thin aspect-ratio of the framing is peculiar and not ideal, both in terms of composition but also utility. It seems more the photo has been cropped around a knife-shaped rectangle rather than the objects arranged within a more conventional frame. The perpendicular arrangement of the blade to the viewer is not dynamic. The knife is resting propped against the bread as though someone where taking a photograph of it, rather than its normal resting position of flat-side-up. The overall effect is a bit contrived.
The photo of the person cutting bread on Opinel's breadknife webpage is imo a better image of what is after all a tool that is designed to be used. If one is determined to make a still-life involving bread and a knife, then some more elements would help, such as additional slices, and perhaps the food that is to be placed on top. We do tend to prefer some educational utility for the image, rather than still-life art for its own sake (though it has a place). So you'd get more support if it was more clearly educational. For example, food photography of delicious bread and toppings making me hungry for it, or hand-tool photography showing the proper knife being actively used to cut bread. -- Colin (talk) 15:39, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak support I like the composition, it works well for me, and I appreciate the skill involved. For a more clear FP, however, I'd prefer to see a shot that's a little bit more dynamic - for example, as Colin suggests, a photo showing the knife being used to cut bread. This is a good still-life and overall I think deserves a feature, but it's not the kind of images that grabs you straight away. Cmao20 (talk) 16:02, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak oppose I was going to support, as this is way better than the other photo in terms of color and contrast, i.e. it makes you want to have a slice of the bread, until I read Colin's oppose, and I just can't unthink it, so to speak. The more you look at it after reading, the more you'd want to see a serrated knife in the image. Daniel Case (talk) 19:07, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Per Colin--Boothsift 22:10, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 07:40, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kaupanger stavkyrkje 2018 take 3.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 23:45:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kaupanger stave church
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 07:39, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings

File:Rådhuset metro station in August 2019.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2019 at 09:48:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rådhuset metro station, Stockholm
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:53, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:Greenland 467 (35130903436).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2019 at 08:40:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sled dogs
Confirmed results:
Result: 27 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:08, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora

File:L'embarquement quai des Orfèvres sur l'île de la Cité, Paris 2019.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2019 at 07:04:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 13:06, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Asahi Breweries headquarters building with the Asahi Flame and Skytree at blue hour with full moon, Sumida-ku, Tokyo, Japan.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2019 at 03:16:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Asahi Flame and Skytree at blue hour with full moon, Tokyo
Done -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:32, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Japan

File:20131013-22. Kokneses pils, rudens.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 23:54:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Koknese Castle, Koknese, Latvia

 I withdraw my nomination I'm surprised, since I really loved the composition, but it seems unlikely that this will get enough support to cross the bar. Cmao20 (talk) 16:06, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 16:06, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ansberg Blickrichtung Süden 120324.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2019 at 08:16:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View from the Ansberg in Franconian Switzerland southward
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:07, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany

File:Die Schöllenen Schlucht mit Teufelsbrücke im schweizerischen Kanton Uri.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2019 at 08:44:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Schöllenen Gorge in Switzerland.
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:08, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Switzerland

File:T-centralen metro station december 2017 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2019 at 11:59:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

T-centralen metro station.
Confirmed results:
Result: 29 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:09, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors

File:View to Castle Hill Peak from Red Peak, Torlesse Range, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Aug 2019 at 21:08:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View to Castle Hill Peak from Red Peak, Torlesse Range, New Zealand
Confirmed results:
Result: 30 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 09:14, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#New_Zealand

File:Prunus avium duracina - flowers - Sasbach.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 06:47:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Flowers of a cherry tree (Prunus avium subsp. duracina) at Sasbach, Germany
Confirmed results:
Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:09, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Bloemknop van een Alcea x Althaea ‘Park Rondell’. 02-08-2019. (d.j.b). 02.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 15:23:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:11, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family Malvaceae

File:Microcentrum retinerve Mex2019.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 13:14:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:10, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Piri Ries Cairo Map.png, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 18:04:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A 16th century Map of Cairo drawn by Piri Ries.
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:12, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Playing in the Nuba mountains.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 00:55:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

People playing in a "Yida refugee camp in South Sudanese territory, 20 km far from the border with Sudan," in 2013. This photo was the first place winner in the Wiki Loves Africa 2019 competition.
The ground in the left background appears to have a tilt, but the right foreground looks level, I so I think that the photo doesn't need a tilt correction, but others are welcome to comment regarding this point. --Pine (✉) 01:00, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 10:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Africa

File:African Leopard Near Otavi Waterhole Etosha Namibia.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 07:00:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Young African leopard
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:07, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora

File:Friesach Dominikanerkirche Johannesaltar 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 05:44:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Saint John Altarpiece, Friesach
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:08, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Austria

File:Grand'Rue in Colmar 01.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 08:34:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Grand'Rue in Colmar, Haut-Rhin, France
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:09, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:North-west facade of the Castle of Chambord 03.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 08:40:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

North-west façade of the Castle of Chambord, Loir-et-Cher, France
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:10, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Santuario de Las Lajas, Ipiales, Colombia, 2015-07-21, DD 26-27 HDR.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 10:57:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Las Lajas Sanctuary is a basilica church, Nariño, municipality of Ipiales, Colombia.
It's the worst on the top left, actually, I added a note. --СССР (talk) 17:46, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
СССР: Still surprised to categorize that as "strong CA", but anyhow, it's gone. The right side is also "fixed" since I've cropped it Poco2 08:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's neither gone nor looking any different, actually. --СССР (talk) 15:47, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'll be home tonight and will check it again with a better and calibrated screen. If there's actually room for improvement regarding the CA, I'll upload a new version latest tomorrow. Poco2 10:55, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
СССР: ✓ New version uploaded. I checked though the former version on my usual screen and still cannot share the severity of CA traces here Poco2 18:24, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:11, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bonnet Macaque DSC 1125.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 18:00:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:46, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals

File:VST image of the spectacular star-forming region Messier 17 (Omega Nebula).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 17:01:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

star-forming region Messier 17 (Omega Nebula)
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:47, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy

File:Beelitz Abandoned Building.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 18:23:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abandoned building in Germany

 I withdraw my nomination Thank you guys, this nomination was kind of rushed --Boothsift 03:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Citrus flower 2019-06-13 09-54-06 (C)-PSD.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 22:13:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Macro stack from 28 frames
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:19, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Swayambhunath Stupa -Kathmandu Nepal-0336.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 21:59:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Swayambhunath Stupa -Kathmandu
@СССР and Famberhorst: ✓ Done Thank you -Bijay chaurasia (talk) 07:59, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 06:20, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Nepal

File:Petroglifos de Las Labradas 13.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 18:45:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Petroglyphs of the archaeological site of Las Labradas, situated on the coast of the municipality of San Ignacio (Mexican state of Sinaloa).
 I withdraw my nomination --Gzzz zz 20:56, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 20:00, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:2016 12 ZooStralsund Löwe IMG 1553.JPG, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 13:56:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A lion in the zoo of Stralsund
 I withdraw my nomination I noticed too late that the image in GFDL 1.2-only - what a pitty! --D-Kuru (talk) 14:02, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 0 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 20:01, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cabo de Buena Esparanza, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-23, DD 74-80 PAN.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 19:40:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 20:02, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:PIA19048 realistic color Europa mosaic.jpg (delist), not delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2019 at 11:33:52
Europe planet surface

  • It could also be argued that an upscale is a major digital change, so should've been added with Template:Retouched image before being listed as a candidate, as per FPC guide.
  • As zooming in unnecessarily decreases the overall quality of the image, it is unlikely to meet several points of COM:IG, such as noise, color and editing. This featured version suffers from severe chromatic aberrations and a jagged planet edge which the original does not. (Original nomination)
  •  Delist -- BevinKacon (talk) 11:33, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist because upscaling is pointless as it does nothing except adds file size without improvement in the actual detail preserved. That said, before this goes any further, may I suggest a delist-and-replace instead, replacing this one with the original non-upscaled image? The original still meets minimum size requirements and is by far the sharpest and best quality image of Europa on the internet. Cmao20 (talk) 14:34, 17 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist Daniel Case (talk) 01:46, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep@BevinKacon: @Cmao20: @Daniel Case: Much of the commentary above is inaccurate. In the case of the "original nomination", the image had not been upsampled at that point, and the nomination failed, with one respondent as well as the moderator commenting on the supposedly inadequate size of the image. In the second nomination in Commons, after upsampling, the upscaling was prominently mentioned prior to the voting in the first line of the description, as follows:
"Uploader's notes: the original NASA TIFF image has been modified by increasing linear pixel dimensions by a factor of 1.6 (to bring out fine detail), sharpening and conversion to JPEG format."
Given that, the template would have been largely redundant. Note that the non-upsampled version is now listed separately.
In the case of the Wikipedia vote, there were three votes in favor of the upsampled version (The NMI User, myself, and Bammesk), not just one (the latter voted for both versions), and four votes in favor of the non-upsampled version (again counting Bammesk). The non-upsampled version was promoted to FP short of the required five votes, so due process was not followed in that case. Due process was followed in the Commons vote, with 11 votes in favor and one opposed. What justification can there be to reverse this decision?
As for the supposed "severe" defects in the upsampled version, please demonstrate the difference with screen captures. Regarding the upsampling being "pointless", on the contrary, it was combined with sharpening to make the fine geological detail more easily visible, as I will demonstrate in a subsequent post. WolfmanSF (talk) 05:43, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Please carefully examine, at full scale, this image: Comparison of mosaics
which contains corresponding sections of the 2 mosaics, if you want to try to understand why I or someone else might have the temerity to upsample and sharpen an image. By way of introduction, the ice-covered surface of Europa is covered with an extraordinary set of fascinating geological features, including the so-called lineae, linear features that form on a variety of scales via a tectonic process. Now, please look at the smallest lineae and other features visible in the images. From my perspective, the ability to see and appreciate the profusion of small lineae is greatly enhanced in the 1.6x upsampled image. These features of course are real, not artifacts. A lot of the lineae that are easily visible from a normal viewing distance at the larger scale are only visible at the smaller scale if you press your nose up to the monitor, and in some cases not even then. Since these geologic features are, from my perspective, and the perspective of others interested in planetary geology, the most interesting aspect of the image, the value gained in making them much more easily visible outweighs any cost incurred in terms of greater chromatic aberration and/or more jagged edges. It is normal for editing processes to have both benefits and costs, and the net result is a benefit in this case in my opinion. Given that the upsampled version got 11 votes and went on to become a POTY finalist while the non-upsampled version only got 6 and was not promoted in Commons, it seems some others agree with me. WolfmanSF (talk) 09:13, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep This was a finalist in Picture of the Year 2018, I don't think it would be a great idea to delist this picture. --Boothsift 04:23, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep per others. (And shouldn't the "oppose" votes be "keep", so as not to confuse things?) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:57, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info WolfmanSF and Boothsift per Ikan's comment, could you please use the 'keep' or 'delist' in this nomination. 'Oppose' or 'support' are for normal FCP noms. Thanks, --Cart (talk) 09:14, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Sorry but I don't buy these arguments. Although due process was technically followed in the commons vote, the nominator did not mention in the nomination that the image was upsampled, and nor did the voters appear to be aware of this. Therefore, I do think the criteria for a delist nomination are satisfied, and that it's appropriate to ask us to think again. WolfmanSF, I understand now why you decided to upsample, but to me this is an argument only for keeping the upsampled version on Commons, not for featuring it instead of the original. Ultimately all the detail is there in the original photo, and upsampling could easily be done client-side if anyone wishes to view the lineae in higher resolution. Therefore my vote remains to delist, and ideally to replace with the original. Cmao20 (talk) 15:05, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry, which "criteria are satisfied'? Where does it state that a nominator must mention image edits in the nomination, in addition to in the image description? One of the voters (the only negative vote in the 11-1 vote) did mention, and provided a link to, the alternate (original, non-upsampled) version. There is also a rule, "Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support", and the upsampled version got 11 votes while the original got 6. WolfmanSF (talk) 07:02, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Regarding the feasibility of anyone else making similar edits to better view the detail, it's obviously possible, but the proportion of WP and Commons readers who would have the software, experience and initiative to do so is vanishingly small. WolfmanSF (talk) 07:15, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Result: 3 delist, 5 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. --A.Savin 20:03, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:SenatorWetmoreInAutomobile retouched.jpg (delist), delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Aug 2019 at 23:11:38
Kriéger Landaulet owned by George Wetmore 

Result: 10 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --A.Savin 20:05, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Porters Pass with Big Ben Range, Torlesse Range, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2019 at 00:55:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Porters Pass with Big Ben Range, Torlesse Range, New Zealand
@W.carter: He's not the only one. Daniel Case (talk) 17:24, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 06:22, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#New_Zealand

File:Vulpes vulpes Mallnitz 01.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2019 at 05:54:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Vulpes vulpes
Confirmed results:
Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Boothsift 06:22, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Canidae_(Canids)

File:Close-up portrait of an old woman.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2019 at 18:01:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Close-up portrait of an old woman
  • Could you amend the nomination to include the photographer's name and give them due credit here. Then I'm sure this little Q/A about authorship could be deleted. -- Colin (talk) 08:28, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Cmao20. I don't really understand the "old person with lines in their face" link with "strong character". You get lines from smoking and from sun damage from being outdoors a lot. Nothing to do with character. The capture, with her looking off camera and her mouth open with no teeth to smile with, seems unflattering, and not special enough for FP. -- Colin (talk) 08:28, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Agree with Yann's review, but this potential "strong character" is not something that particularly conquers me here. I like the wrinkles, but her facial expression is neither very clear, hospitable or prodigal. Added to this, the landscape format for this portrait, cutting the chin and the forehead, doesn't add anything to the composition in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:07, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Cmao here--Boothsift 05:35, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Cmao and Colin. Daniel Case (talk) 17:43, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination Yann (talk) 17:50, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:24, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Farr 40 sailboat racing off Newport Beach by Don Ramey Logan.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2019 at 15:55:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A Farr 40 sailboat racing off Newport Beach
Hello Don and welcome back to FPC. Unfortunately the system with codes and Bots and everything is not designed for nominating an "Alt" the way you did, so I've tweaked the code for you. An Alt is almost always just another version of the original nomination, like a cropped or otherwise fixed version. You are very welcome to add the other photo in another nom, just remember only two at a time. --Cart (talk) 17:29, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral I very much like the unconvential viewpoint of this one, but the deck of the boat is blown out. I'm not sure whether that matters too much, as it's probably close to white to begin with, but I also think it could be sharper considering that the resolution isn't as high as many similar shots. The other image would unfortunately be an oppose from me, as I much prefer the viewpoint in this one. Cmao20 (talk) 16:03, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I like the idea of this one, but even if the deck weren't severely posterized I'd still find the shadow at the bottom distracting. I'm sure there's an FP along these lines waiting to be taken. Daniel Case (talk) 18:39, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Daniel--Boothsift 05:31, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination--Don (talk) 07:25, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Münster, Montgolfiade (an den Aaseewiesen) -- 2019 -- 9643.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2019 at 14:09:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hot air balloons at the 49th Montgolfiade in Münster (1st race), North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany
Sorry, can't do this at the moment; Internet seems slow. Daniel Case (talk) 03:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I'll try it with a crop of around 20 percent within the next days. --XRay talk 04:03, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to get it on the image page. Take a look. Daniel Case (talk) 04:35, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:2013-09-19 14-30-57-collegiale-thann-PA00085696.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 13:48:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Collégiale Saint-Thiébaut de Thann, classée Monument Historique
Confirmed results:
Result: 4 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:14, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bike with trailer at Gamla Strandgatan 10, Gamlestan, Lysekil.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2019 at 11:23:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bike with trailer at Gamla Strandgatan 10, Gamlestan, Lysekil
  • Sorry, even if the bike has a 'cart', it's not mine. Here you don't touch an unknown person's bike unless you intend to steal it. :-) I like that it's close to the stairs. You can imagine the owner getting off the bike, continue up the stairs and in through the door. It gives momentum to the image. --Cart (talk) 14:05, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 5 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:17, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Oregrund (92918)p.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 18:01:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Öregrund Hamn, a marina in an old Swedish fishing town

File:Weißstorch P1170558.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2019 at 15:58:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Feeding of young storks
  •  Oppose Fischer.H, all 15 of your nominations at FP have had problems with the FP category, which is required to link to a page and section in our FP collection, that actually exists, so that reviewers can compare your image with existing similar, and so that the closing admins can insert the image into the correct location. You have been reminded about this several times, and you are no longer a newbie. The above is a redlink. So here's my procedural oppose. Please fix this nomination and get it right next time. -- Colin (talk) 17:22, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • From the newbie perspective: I also find the category format confusing. Why is it not /Animals/Birds#Order:Ciconiiformes_(Storks)/Family:Ciconiidae_(Storks) or .../Ciconiiformes_(Storks)#Family:Ciconiidae_(Storks) or .../Ciconiiformes_(Storks)/Ciconiidae_(Storks) or .../Ciconiiformes/Ciconiidae_(Storks)? The rule seems to be: only get the category page by address and then jump to the family by anchor -- and never forget to replace the spaces. There is nothing in the tutorial to make it easier. It just reads: "Select a category from COM:FP". Not too helpful. --Axel Tschentscher (talk) 18:36, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is poorly designed, but really not difficult to work out. I suggested on the FP talk page that nominations should point to the animal family (not just Animals/Birds in this case) but no one was interested. My opinion is that this change would help voters see any exisitng FPs more easily. Charles (talk) 21:48, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I agree it should point to the family (birds, insects, flowers are too big to help) which also helps the closing admin. Start a talk page discussion about instructions for newbies, etc, but Fisher.H isn't a newbie. Axel fixed it for him, which is clearly his intention not to be bothered and expect others to fix it every time. Those who administer our FP pages have enough thankless work to do, and reviewers need all the help they can get to encourage them to compare against the photo's peers. This is the least a nominator can do to help, and just basic courtesy to oblige when repeatedly asked. -- Colin (talk) 07:01, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eastern great egret (Ardea alba modesta) stretching its neck and preening.jpg, featured, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2019 at 01:54:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eastern great egret stretching and preening
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:35, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Family : Ardeidae (Herons)

File:Dragonfly in flight, in Laos.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2019 at 17:21:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pantala flavescens (globe skimmer, globe wanderer or wandering glider)
 Comment I wonder why. Why shouldn't there be two very good images of the same object? FP isn't VI --D-Kuru (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Great on its own standards, but far too similar to the one Basile nominated. Sure, FP isn't VI, but the composition and background are just so similar to the other one. There's no need to promote two images that are 90% the same. Better to have a lot more variety in what we promote. Cmao20 (talk) 23:00, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Withdrawn by author Thanks a lot, D-Kuru, I'm really honored by the nomination. Your idea is not absurd, the consensus sometimes promote 95% similar pictures in FP like those ones. However, for the diversity, in my opinion we should wait at least next year. This is also better for the votes during the POTY challenge. But I'm sure you'll find good and different works here by others. Enjoy FPC! Kind regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 00:58, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sacristía Mayor, Catedral de Sevilla, Sevilla, España, 2015-12-06, DD 112-114 HDR.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2019 at 16:22:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling of the Great Sacristy, Cathedral of Seville, Seville, Spain
  • As a history student with particular interest in ecclesiastical history, it is always a pleasure to see interesting church architecture captured in such detail. Of course I have nominated lots of Diliff's photos, but you have plenty of good material too. Cmao20 (talk) 17:09, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Spain

File:Salisbury Cathedral Nave, Wiltshire, UK - Diliff.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2019 at 16:30:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The nave of Salisbury Cathedral in Wiltshire, England, looking east from the font.
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#United Kingdom

File:CarduelisChlorisBerry.jpg, delisted[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 20:11:25
SHORT DESCRIPTION 

Result: 10 delist, 0 keep, 0 neutral => delisted. --Cart (talk) 11:07, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Calaveras Tonalá (2).jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Sep 2019 at 21:14:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceramic calaveras, at Tonalá's tianguis (market) in the State of Jalisco, Mexico, before the Day of the Dead.
Confirmed results:
Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 07:01, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects

File:Angelus Hut in the winter, Nelson Lakes National Park, New Zealand.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Sep 2019 at 06:34:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Angelus Hut in the winter, Nelson Lakes National Park, New Zealand
@W.carter: For the title alone, I think the Cocteau Twins' "How to Bring a Blush to the Snow" works best. Daniel Case (talk) 16:39, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:05, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#New_Zealand

File:Bandits Roost, 59 and a half Mulberry Street.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 15:59:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mulberry St by Jacob Riis
Confirmed results:
Result: 7 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 19:08, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Waldemarsviken (62433)p.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 01:38:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Waldemarsviken, a harbor in Stockholm between Djurgården and Beckholmen
Seems natural to me. The light greatly resembles some of my photos from Helsinki, like this one. The Cosmonaut (talk) 22:01, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Looks fine to me. A normal cloudy late summer light to me. Regardless if it is the exact temperature that was at the time, I think it suits the scene. It's a light you often get over the city at any time of the year. --Cart (talk) 08:58, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 07:31, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places#Sweden

File:Lillian Feickert c. 1912.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2019 at 04:41:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lillian Feickert

File:Centaurea cyanus - Keila.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 12:29:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Centaurea cyanus
Confirmed results:
Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:46, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales

File:Old World swallowtail (Papilio machaon gorganus) underside Italy.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 11:53:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Old World swallowtail (Papilio machaon gorganus) in Italy
  •  Support Too bad it's f/5.6 or the wingtips would have been sharp, too. Still great. --Axel Tschentscher (talk) 12:21, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I have FPX'd the other two delists. The rules are clear. Delist "is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images". Charles is attempting an illegal "delist and replace" over three nominations (and only two active nominations are permitted and Charles currently has four). The D&R of "better photos of the same subject" is a Wikipedia thing, because they generally only have one lead image. Let's not bring that practice here, where images that are fine but considered inferior to a new one are routinely delisted. -- Colin (talk) 13:43, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have not done an illegal "delist and replace". I have listed two images for delisting as suggested by Peulle. The rules state "There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations." So can I ask someone else to check out Colin's actions, please. I may be wrong. Charles (talk) 14:23, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  • As noted elsewhere, I incorrectly assumed the two-nominations applied to both kind rather than independently. The other two remain FPX'd because they are an illegal "delist and replace" albeit spread over three nominations. The rules for delist state "it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images". This should be quite clear. We have countless nominations where photographers indicate existing FPs of their subject/topic, claim theirs is better or different and worthy of a gold star, and do not go about eliminating all the others. It just isn't done and would require consensus for a rule change to permit it. -- Colin (talk) 17:18, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Axel (talk) 14:38, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Angels Landing and the Great White Throne.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 20:47:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Angels Landing and the Great White Throne, Zion National Park, USA
It was a stock 14-42 mm f/3.5-5.6 lens at f/8, which hasn't performed a whole lot better than this for me. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:22, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, kit lenses are never going to give the best sharpness, and there's a lot of sample variation so you might have an inferior copy. I used to shoot with a Nikon 18-55mm f/3.5-5.6 DX, and as you can see in File:Painted Ladies San Francisco January 2013 panorama 2.jpg while center sharpness is just fine, the edges are weak even at f/8 (or f/11 full-frame equivalent). A lens that peaks at f/8 is especially bad on m4/3 because you're using the equivalent of f/16 full-frame, where diffraction is certainly visible (even if it isn't a deal-breaker as it might be at f/22 or smaller). But for some reason your lens seems to lack punch even in the center. Something like the 12-35mm f/2.8 would work wonders and allow you to shoot at a larger aperture such as f/5.6 when you don't need the DOF. Regardless, in the present case I wouldn't use such a large radius for sharpening because it just creates haloes everywhere and doesn't actually improve sharpness. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:15, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I actually upgraded to a D3300 a few years ago and I'm very happy with the kit lens (18-55mm f/3.5-5.6G VR II). At 55 mm, it's quite sharp, allowing to produce fairly respectable flower close-ups. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per above. It's a shame though, because you have a really decent composition there. But it does look insufficiently detailed and oversharpened to compensate. I don't suppose you have the RAW files so we can see if it could be processed any better? Cmao20 (talk) 23:29, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Alas, no, I don't even have the original jpegs prior to stitching. Served me a good lesson for having backups though. The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:56, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Central hidroeléctrica de Walchensee, Kochel, Baviera, Alemania, 2014-03-22, DD 04.JPG, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 14:09:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Turbines room of the Walchensee Hydroelectric Power Station, Kochel, Bavaria, Germany.
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:40, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Industry#Germany

File:Frauenstein Schloss Frauenstein Ost-Ansicht 15082019 6966.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 18:10:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Eastern view of castle Frauenstein
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:35, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Austria

File:Rufous-collared sparrow (Zonotrichia capensis costaricensis) 2.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2019 at 20:23:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Rufous-collared sparrow (Zonotrichia capensis costaricensis) in Panama
Confirmed results:
Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:41, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passeridae_(Sparrows)

File:20190817 Widok na Most Karola i Zamek na Hradczanach z Wieży Staromiejskiej Mostu Karola 2038 5630 DxO.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Sep 2019 at 05:42:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

20190817 Widok na Most Karola i Zamek na Hradczanach z Wieży Staromiejskiej Mostu Karola 2038 5630 DxO.jpg

 I withdraw my nomination --Boothsift 01:19, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:The Owlet.jpg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Sep 2019 at 07:51:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 14:24, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Loxodonta africana - Etosha 2013.jpg, not featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Sep 2019 at 06:37:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

 I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 20:22, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 02:11, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/August_2019&oldid=363994997"