Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/February 2005

This is an archive for Commons:Featured picture candidates page debates and voting.
The debates are closed and should not be edited.

Image:Punta San Vigilio.jpg not featured

Punta San Vigilio and Baia delle Sirene, Lago di Garda (Italy)

• Self-nomination, no vote. —MRB 13:19, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose : nothing special, no beautiful colours / Urban 16:22, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose: weak colours / back light -- Bernd Untiedt 21:16, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 09:58, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support, baie paradisiaque. Greudin 10:52, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose same argument as Bernd Untiedt. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose -- Aka 11:16, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Darkone (¿!) 12:46, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Grand Trianon5.JPG not featured

Grand Trianon, Versailles.

• Nominate and support. Urban 19:52, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose: I don't like the perspective (a little bit skew). —MRB 20:24, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose: unfavourable perspective -- Bernd Untiedt 21:11, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 09:59, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• weak support imho, recentred the subject by cutting off the marchs and top. Greudin 10:54, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose the building is tilting. A part of the base under one of the pillars is missing. Nice colors and lines though. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose -- Aka 11:22, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Darkone (¿!) 12:26, 24 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bayeux-crypte1.JPG featured

• selfnominate, crypt in the cathedral of Bayeux, 11th century, France -- Urban 13:31, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support - impressive Andreas Tille 18:22, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support - I like this one. bdesham 01:31, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support Image très austère. --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Thomas G. Graf 16:09, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Bernd Untiedt 16:11, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support weird lighting but i like it :-) --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Norro 00:19, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. villy 07:38, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Escoville Lanternon zoom.jpg not featured

• selfnominate, Hôtel d'Escoville, 16th century, Caen, France -- Urban 13:38, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 17:42, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose nothing typical in this image. Andreas Tille 18:24, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose nothing special / jpeg-artefacts -- Bernd Untiedt 15:50, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose I would clone the black area in the upper right corner blue like the sky, and use neatimage to smoothen the sky. Is the tower tilting a little bit? --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:GlockSousafonMG2003Cont.jpg featured

Costumed musicians on a foggy Mardi Gras Day, New Orleans.

• nominate and support: this picture stunned me: the persons as on a rubens-painting, the colours as an impressionist painting, but a complete modern picture. great not only in technical terms. Denisoliver 09:03, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support - picturesque --Tsui 03:09, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• weak support It would be perfect - without the nose on the left side and if we could see the face of the women, not only the big b... -- Bernd Untiedt 16:06, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 10:05, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Greudin 11:37, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. villy 21:35, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support would like to get rid of the nose, but apart from that an interesting pic. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Urban 08:13, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support really well, almost a painting -- Lviatour 08:47, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Neutrality 02:53, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose a little bit too light and too less contrast, bad composition (but I know this is not easy in such a situation) --Aka 11:01, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --norro 21:41, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support I was the photographer. I've been told this photo captures New Orleans Mardi Gras atmosphere well. -- Infrogmation 14:45, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Saint Vitus Cathedral in Prague.jpg not featured

• Self-nomination, no vote. --Valyag 23:39, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support - cool! bdesham 01:26, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• weak oppose I don't like the perspective. I'd prefer a detail, or the whole facade taken less close to the cathedral... Sorry for my bad English --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 15:52, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support -- Ranveig 12:42, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 11:36, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. villy 21:34, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose same argument as Mbcmf217 --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I just want to add that it's impossible to take a photo less close to the cathedral because there is a wall there :-( --Valyag 17:30, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Then is it possible to move side ? --Mbcmf217 10:48, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

I'm not really sure I understand. Of course, you can walk to the left and to the right. --Valyag 22:02, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Support --Fanghong 02:16, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose I don't like the perspective, a shorter focal length would help -- Aka 11:14, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Alpamayo.jpg featured

Alpamayo, Andes, Peru (Public Domain)

• Nominate and support. RedWolf 08:40, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Christiaan 11:34, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Heidas 17:05, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Jcornelius 21:01, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. villy 18:08, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. --Emuzesto 21:45, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. --Dxman 05:20, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support - Kpjas 22:23, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Thomas G. Graf 12:46, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —MRB 20:26, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support — Bernd Untiedt 21:05, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Great with the people, it shows how big the mountain is. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: This is a Stock.Xchg image. Has the license issue been resolved? It's currently tagged as PD, but shouldn't it be CopyrightedFreeUse? --MarkSweep 06:29, 18 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support The web already note:"There are no usage restrictions for this photo." --Fanghong 02:23, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Aka 10:30, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Lviatour 06:02, 23 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:WernigerodeCastleWinter.jpg featured

The castle of Wernigerode, Germany in Winter, by Tillea. (There is also a Fall/Autumn version.)

NOTE: A new version was uploaded recently. Purge your browser's image cache if it doesn't show up right away.

• Nominate and support. --MarkSweep 06:33, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. villy 17:58, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. RedWolf 19:55, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Ossiostborn 18:20, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —Norro 21:43, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Sir Gawain 18:51, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Urban 19:40, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• I prefer the Autumn version, but I would also support this one. --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• oppose Nice, but sloping and not sharp. -- Bernd Untiedt 15:58, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support Much better now -- Bernd Untiedt 22:52, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • I don't understand what you mean by "sloping". Is this something that could be changed by rotating the image slightly? --MarkSweep 06:31, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
    • Yes, the tower is not perfect upright. (Does the word skew describes it better?)-- Bernd Untiedt 18:23, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
      • Well, OK. I've notified the photographer. In case of pictures created by Wikipedians, better to give the creator a chance to address these objections. --MarkSweep 03:22, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
      • Update: In collaboration with the original photographer, I've created and uploaded what I think is an improved version (disclaimer: this statement has not yet been evaluated by the photographer). --MarkSweep 11:38, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
      • It has now. ;-) Many thanks Mark for your fine work! Andreas Tille 13:28, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Weak oppose: same argumentation as Bernd gave. --Thomas G. Graf 10:07, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• oppose not sharp 84.188.193.187 08:55, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose nice lighting and colors though. I'm not sure if it is not sharp or it is just a bad compression, but it ruins the smooth feel. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • See if you like the new version better. --MarkSweep 11:38, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Ranveig 21:50, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —- a bit more snow on the roofs would have been nice and cosy but still a good image. // Solkoll 21:44, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose still too noisy and blurred -- Aka 10:31, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Boat on Euphrates.jpg not featured

A man and women make their way up the Euphrates in Basra, Iraq - 27 Feb, 2003

• Self-nominate and support. —Christiaan 20:01, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Emuzesto 21:45, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Tsui 02:03, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose – not particularly striking, and non-notable as well (IMO). bdesham 03:46, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  Comment: I've seen someone else call a photo non-notable. Where does this policy come from? Most of the photos on Wikimedia would be non-notable wouldn't they? —Christiaan 18:12, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

  I knew I worded that badly :-) In general, if a picture is striking, I vote in support without considering the notability. If the picture is not striking, however, I still look at the notability and I may vote in support if I consider the picture notable enough. For me, this picture is neither striking nor particularly notable.

  I don't think this represents a policy so much as my (and probably others') individual opinions. --bdesham 20:04, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Support —Norro 21:44, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose I'd like to see the faces Richardfabi 22:56, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 12:47, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose the horison is tilting and I would like to see their faces. Its good that the trees are in the background, I would like to se the pic with the rest of the treetops :-) --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support very special, the faces are not important compared the beautiful water --Fanghong 02:31, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support --Mbcmf217 07:49, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• oppose -- Fabien1309 19:32, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) : Not striking, background is blurry

Image:Swan.jpg not featured

• selfnominate, I like the pict because you can see the hydrophobic effect of the plums Richardfabi 23:02, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Whether it shows the hydrophobic effect, the face is too dark. --Thomas G. Graf 12:45, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Agree with last comment —Christiaan 18:13, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support I personally don't think it's too dark... --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support nice composition and sharpness, would like a little more light on the swans face though. --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --norro 13:37, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Ranveig 17:14, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Nice composition, good overall effect -- Vadakkan 17:33, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose only a swan head, not the whole animal --Schaengel89 @me 20:33, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Streifenhoernchen.jpg featured

• selfnominate, a tamias sibiricus Richardfabi 23:05, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Support. Cannot resist... cute... fluffy... animals... --MarkSweep 23:53, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support It's a very good pic too. —Christiaan 23:59, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Likely NOT a campground dwelling fella, he's not fat enough! RedWolf 06:52, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Good shot and cute motive! --Thomas G. Graf 12:41, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support irresistible --Tsui 03:05, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support What could I say ? They've all said it --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support -- Bernd Untiedt 16:00, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Atamari 21:21, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Lviatour 08:38, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- I want one of those. I love the "knytts", (a old Norse word for small creatures), of the woods. // Solkoll 21:51, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Aka 10:57, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Pinguicula_vulgaris.JPG featured

• selfnomination, no vote. Denisoliver 02:06, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support (already an excellent picture in the German WP?) --Thomas G. Graf

@Thomas: you're right, this picture is already marked as excellent in the German WP, I hope it is not unwanted to make such a picture a candidate here ? if it is, then i am sorry and will draw it back immediately. Denisoliver 15:03, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

No, it's okay ... --Thomas G. Graf 18:31, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• support. villy 18:29, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose The object has a very bad contrast to the background. If this is typical for this kind of plant I would take back my opinion ... Andreas Tille 18:20, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose,Darkone (¿!) 16:46, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support nice colors --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support. -- Bernd Untiedt 10:19, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Yosemite meadows 2004-09-04.jpg featured

Yosemite National Park, Half Dome in the background, by PDphoto.org's Jon Sullivan

• Nominate and support. --MarkSweep 07:31, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support Christiaan 08:06, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. bdesham 20:52, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support RedWolf 08:46, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Urban 15:07, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• I would support it if you would make this image more panorama-like by just cropping about 1/3 of the gras in the foreground. Andreas Tille 18:11, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • You're right, the perspective is not ideal. A similar picture [1] was a Featured Picture candidate over at the English Wikipedia recently but did not get supported largely for technical reasons (JPEG compression artifacts). I negotiated a hi-rez version with PDphoto.org, but got this shot instead. I could try to get in touch with them again to get a hi-rez version of the other shot which shows less of the grass and more of the sky. --MarkSweep 06:02, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • same comment. --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose the horison is tilting a bit, but apart from this it is a great pic. If it is corrected, i'll support it. I don't think it needs to be cropped in any way --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
  • Wha'??? Look at the trees. They are, on average, upright. Could it be that the meadow is naturally uneven? It seems pretty level to me in the right half of the image, rising gently toward the left. --MarkSweep 09:31, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Campo de Criptana Molinos de Viento 1.jpg featured

Windmills in Campo de Criptana, La Mancha, España. Photo by User:Lourdes Cardenal.

• Nominate and support. -- Infrogmation 21:52, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Comment: would it be possible to get a higher-resolution version of this image? bdesham 23:34, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• I would also like a bigger version. --Thomas G. Graf 13:55, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support, but a better resolution would be fine --Heidas 17:03, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support, even though the bigger the better. villy 18:13, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support, bigger! --Emuzesto 21:45, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —Norro 21:42, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support, but only if a higher resolution is available. --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support There's already a higher resolution version, it's beautiful! --Anna 00:32, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Willy 13:54, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --ManuelGR 19:12, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Xiao yan ta.jpg not featured

• Nominate and support.--Fanghong 02:45, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Emuzesto 18:39, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. Don't like the perspective. It's better to step back a little like in this image (not free). --MarkSweep 20:27, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support I don't mind the perspective; it gives me a "wow, that's really tall" reaction. -- Infrogmation 20:35, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - strange perspective --Thomas G. Graf 13:57, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support -- Ranveig 12:40, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose unfavourable perspective / skew -- Bernd Untiedt 10:52, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose the tower is tilting --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Sabaa Nissan Militiaman.jpg featured

Iraqi militiaman at Sabaa Nissan ('the 7th of April') water treatment plant in Baghdad

• Self-nominate and support. —Christiaan 22:09, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support - subject is perhaps not notable (not personally, anyway), but it's a great picture. bdesham 02:34, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support David.Monniaux 12:38, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support We can even see the photograph through these eyes... --Mbcmf217 17:20, 3 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Emuzesto 18:38, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Good photo (could be used to illustrate beard, type of headgear, etc). -- Infrogmation 20:30, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Thomas G. Graf 13:52, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Heidas 17:02, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support wonderful portrait Richardfabi 22:55, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support expressive portrait (reminds me of a former boss of mine, without the kufiya) --Tsui 09:10, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Bernd Untiedt 10:51, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support strongly - an absolutely wonderful picture. Regardless of the utility of the picture (as mentioned above) is is absolutely beautiful and could be nominated on this alone. --Oldak Quill 18:34, 17 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:SzéchenyiAussen2.JPG not featured

Széchenyi Spa in Budapest at night 2004

• self-nomination, no vote Denisoliver 01:34, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 15:14, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - ruined by the back lights. --Thomas G. Graf 19:20, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 19:23, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Christiaan 22:33, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. villy 18:42, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Weak oppose – I agree with Thomas—the lights in the back are too bright. I would support otherwise, though. bdesham 03:52, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose I'd go again to the same place about one hour earlier or whenever you meet the so called 'blue hour' and try again. Then the lights would not be so confusing as they are at this picture. It is not really bad but it is hard to parse what the image wants to show and thus not really fit for beeing included in a dictionary like WikiPedia. Andreas Tille 18:15, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

WikiPedia is not a dictionary and commons is not limited to WikiPedia --FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• OpposeAs FoeNyx said, it can be better --Malene 09:20, 16 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Orangerie.jpg featured

Orangerie du château de Versailles, France.
Orangery in Versailles castle, France.

• Nominate and support. --Mbcmf217 08:07, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support - the angle seems odd, but I like it anyway. bdesham 00:36, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support avec en prime : "l'orangerie quand on la chatouille" hahaha bon ok. Greudin 09:59, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support (Greudin, your puns are...) David.Monniaux 12:50, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Thomas G. Graf 17:59, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support RedWolf 08:45, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Jcornelius 20:57, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Urban 13:13, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --LadyofHats 11:33, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --FoeNyx 11:51, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Figurine-hand-finition.jpg not featured

Finition à la main d'une figurine.

• Self-nomination, no vote. Greudin
• support interesting. --Emuzesto 23:46, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• weak support Je préférerais un agrandissement du centre de la photo, le bord de gauche me semble inutile. Au demeurant, très bon sujet. --Mbcmf217 08:55, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose bad colors which result from a non professional shot in a closed room, nothing special about the topic, no interesting composition Andreas Tille 13:53, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 10:09, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Urban 13:23, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:TwoDumbbells.JPG not featured

A pair of spinlock dumbbells

• self-nomination, no vote GeorgeStepanek 05:15, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - nothing special, don't like the lights and the composition. --Thomas G. Graf 19:23, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 19:26, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• What is special in these items? David.Monniaux 11:12, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose. It's a decent illustration of dumbells, but not particularly interesting, excellent, or unusual as I think a featured picture should be. -- Infrogmation 20:23, 4 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose black weights with shadows. RedWolf 08:44, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - Urban 19:44, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Golubac.JPG featured

Fort Golubac (Golubacki Grad) in Serbia (Srpska) 2004

• self-nomination, no vote Denisoliver 01:22, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Infrogmation 04:52, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 19:23, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose —Norro 21:39, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support Kpjas 22:21, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 12:50, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose —MRB 09:18, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --LadyofHats 11:34, 11 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Atamari 21:18, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bignone.jpg not featured

Flowers of Trumpet vine (Campsis radicans)
Fleurs de bignone (Campsis radicans)
Photo : 2003

• nominate and support --Mbcmf217 09:52, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support --Emuzesto 11:07, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support très mignonne Greudin 16:29, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support notafish }<';> 10:31, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Weak Oppose --Thomas G. Graf 19:07, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, bad light Richardfabi 22:51, 7 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, Darkone (¿!) 16:44, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, background too dark —MRB 09:24, 12 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, --Atamari 21:31, 15 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:PetrifiedWood.jpg featured

• Nominate and support. wombat 03:47, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Weak oppose - the subject is colorful and interesting, but there's not enough contrast between it and the background—they seem to run right into each other on the left and, to a lesser extent, on the bottom. The shadow is a bit distracting, too. bdesham 21:07, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 12:38, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support with the same comments as Bdesham though notafish }<';> 10:29, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Weak oppose --Thomas G. Graf 18:51, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support with the same comments as Bdesham, but I understand that one cannot easily change the backdrop of a scene. David.Monniaux 12:52, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  This is true, of course. Is anyone skilled enough with Photoshop or The GIMP to try and apply a slight blur to the background of this picture? That would make the subject stand out more. --bdesham 21:29, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

• Support Amazing - Urban 19:43, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support —MRB 20:33, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Saint_Barnard.jpg not featured

Collegiate church of Saint Barnard, in Romans sur Isère, Drôme, France.
Collégiale Saint Barnard à Romans-sur-Isère, Drôme (26), France.

• nominate and support --Mbcmf217 09:51, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• weak oppose. Greudin 06:49, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support --Emuzesto 11:07, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose not so extraordinary notafish }<';> 10:30, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - snapshot --Thomas G. Graf 18:47, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image:RoosterHarbingerOfDawn.png not featured

This year is rooster year in the countries of east Asia. The 9th of February is rooster year New Year of old calendar. This pic may pray them a safe and bright future.

• Nominate and support.--Fanghong 02:10, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - nothing special. --Thomas G. Graf 17:44, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support - the nominator neglected to say that this is an excellent illustration of the art of paper-cuting. -- Ranveig 14:58, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Greudin
• Comment: Could this be cleaned up a bit? The vertical and horizontal lines could be made straight and it could really use some antialiasing on the diagonal lines. --MarkSweep 01:42, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - Urban 19:41, 8 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - don't like the color. —MRB 20:28, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:2419 BBC South Today at London Waterloo.jpg not featured

• Nominate and support. --Emuzesto 13:06, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Weak oppose --Thomas G. Graf 18:06, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Greudin 06:49, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support BernardM 23:48, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose nothing special --Bernd Untiedt 21:36, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose not really spectacular. RedWolf 08:43, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support While it isn't a spectacular subject it is rather a nice photo that plays well with light and has a great composition. Good photo for illustrating all types of things. —Christiaan 11:38, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Support. villy 19:02, 6 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• weak Support --Mbcmf217 09:13, 9 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose —MRB 20:30, 10 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Pommes d amour.jpg featured

• Self-nominate and support. Greudin 20:53, 23

Jan 2005 (UTC)

• support, great colours. shame about the cardboard box. wombat 03:49, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support --Mbcmf217 09:34, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support --Emuzesto 11:07, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Thomas G. Graf 18:49, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support BernardM 23:41, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image:RomaCastelSantAngelo.jpg featured

• Self-Nominate and support. Andreas Tille 06:54, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Emuzesto 13:06, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - not bad, but I don't like the colors and the composition --Thomas G. Graf 18:05, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support very good. -- Infrogmation 03:50, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support I like it. CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 12:40, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose same comment as Thomas above. Castel Sant Angelo does not look a bit like this in my memory. notafish }<';> 10:27, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support. It is an unusual view, presumably due to the compressed perspective of a telephoto lens. I like the composition and the colors. Didn't think at all that this one would be so controversial. --MarkSweep 01:42, 30 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bertioga praia.jpg not featured

• Nominate and support Jurema Oliveira 06:05, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, small, just a snapshot. --Thomas G. Graf 17:52, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose --Heidas 18:31, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, quite bad quality --Mbcmf217 20:23, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Weak oppose - I actually like this picture, but it's too small (the image page says that the original is 1280x960... could that be uploaded?) and the horizon is crooked. bdesham 16:18, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• weak support Greudin 06:50, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose--Mbcmf217 09:48, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose too "travelbook like" notafish }<';> 10:25, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose too small BernardM 23:47, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose nothing special. --Bernd Untiedt 21:34, 31 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Christiaan 22:30, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Kirche Gröben Lichtspiel.JPG not featured

Light traveling through churchwindow, Germany.

• Nominate and support. Uploaded to German wikipedia by user Lienhard Schulz. Copied by me Dub 18:20, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose - too small and not too good --Thomas G. Graf 17:50, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose too small CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose too blurry notafish }<';> 10:24, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Christiaan 22:23, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:GeysirEruptionNear.jpg featured

• Nominate and support. For me already excellent --Heidas 19:56, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Was going to nominate it myself. --MarkSweep 21:08, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose, bad image quality (noise). Darkone (¿!) 23:50, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support - not excellent (noise, composition), but good enough to be featured. --Thomas G. Graf 17:58, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Emuzesto 13:06, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 12:42, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support notafish }<';> 10:23, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support BernardM 23:45, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Just about opposed, with a great subject the image quality just scrapes in —Christiaan 22:23, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Mus Musculus-huismuis.jpg featured

By Wikipedian Rasbak.

• Nominate and support. --MarkSweep 06:34, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support David.Monniaux 07:10, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Ranveig 23:22, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose Bad image quality --Thomas G. Graf 18:08, 19 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Emuzesto 13:06, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose I think the quality is a bit iffy. CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 12:42, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support BernardM 23:44, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Christiaan 22:28, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support --Jcornelius 21:00, 5 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Citrus fruits.jpg featured

From the USDA Agricultural Research Service: Assorted citrus fruit slices on a lightbox. Simple and effective.

• Nominate and support. --MarkSweep 10:21, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Ranveig 11:01, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Was about to nominate it myself --Emuzesto 11:07, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support. -- Infrogmation 17:13, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support. --Fanghong 00:24, 21 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Very nice CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- wombat 03:51, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

anything that creates calm in a world of speed is good for us

• Support it's in my Wallpapers directory. --Mbcmf217 09:46, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support notafish }<';> 10:22, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Christiaan 22:26, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)
• support Orthoseeker 22:26, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Bild 478.jpg featured

Antelope Canyon in Utah, by Wikipedian MeckiM@c.

• Nominate and support. --MarkSweep 10:40, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support --Emuzesto 11:07, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Neutral. It is a striking photograph, but it is dificult to get any idea of the size of what is shown. -- Infrogmation 17:06, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Conditional object. There is no licensing information - we cannot have possible copyright violations as examples of our best work. --Oldak Quill 04:07, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
  • It was uploaded by its creator. Without further information, it's therefore licensed under the GFDL by default. --MarkSweep 06:13, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support (more details about the location, perhaps?) David.Monniaux 07:12, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Aesthetically pleasing, but not sure where it is, the size (as previously mentioned. CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 12:44, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support BernardM 23:41, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Christiaan 22:25, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Urocyon littoralis full figure.jpg featured

I just found the photo from a public domain source (.gov website) and think it's really nice.

• Nominate and support. --Conti|✉ 05:19, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support David.Monniaux 11:53, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support. I was hesitant because the animal kind of blends in with the background, but I guess that's what wild animals do professionally. --MarkSweep 18:38, 13 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support. Exactly the same as above :) notafish }<';> 02:43, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Ranveig 10:50, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Greudin 12:45, 25 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support --Mbcmf217 09:43, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Christiaan 22:16, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Pennsylvania Winter Sunset.jpg featured

• Nominate and support. --Heidas 09:57, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support - I'm glad you like it. --Exdaix 03:00, 16 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Ranveig 22:18, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Nice CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Oppose While it is a nice picture (besides of the branches coming from the left) I do not really know what it makes it so special for WikiPedia. It might be anywhere else besides Pennsylvania and that trees have no leaves in winter time seems normal. Thus I do not know which knowledge we might obtain from this picture (except that the photographer is able to make nice pictures). Andreas Tille 16:15, 24 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  You could say the same thing for the other sunset photos on WikiCommons, such as Panorama-Sonnenuntergang_bei_Königswalde which is a Featured Picture.--Exdaix 03:07, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)

  The interesting thing in this image is the panorama, which is not so common as nice pictures of sunsets. Andreas Tille 20:17, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)

• Support. bdesham 17:42, 28 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Christiaan 22:17, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Image:Kamel hungrig 1.jpg featured

From the "animals close up with a wide-angle lens" department: a hungry camel. By Wikipedian Snjeschok.

• Nominate and support. --MarkSweep 11:00, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Absolutely. --Emuzesto 11:07, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support -- Infrogmation 17:07, 15 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support David.Monniaux 07:10, 17 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support.Shin-? T 09:26, 18 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support CryptoDerk 08:14, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support Greudin 06:54, 26 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support FoeNyx 09:50, 27 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• Support BernardM 23:42, 29 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• support Christiaan 22:27, 2 Feb 2005 (UTC)