Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 16 2016

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Армавир_2011_(0005).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Saint Nicholas Orthodox cathedral in Armavir by S URALA --Archi38 06:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Distortion much too strong, chromatic aberrations, the cupolas at the right side are overexposed. Not a QI. --Cccefalon 08:46, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I fixed chromatic aberrations -Archi38 15:13, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 20:33, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

File:"_12_-_ITALY_-_FIAT_-_Girls_at_Bologna_Motorshow_2012_04.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Woman at Bologna Motorshow by Pava --Archi38 06:14, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Severe magenta and green chromatic aberrations. Not sharp enough for a portrait shot. --Cccefalon 08:44, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
    • I fixed chromatic aberrations -Archi38 15:06, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Noise, CA, blurred, not talking about composition. -- Smial 11:47, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Could be sharper, crop to tight. --Tsungam 14:06, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 20:32, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Sandakan_Sabah_PerpustakaanWilayahSandakan-01.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Sandakan, Sabah: Sandakan Regional Library (Perpustakaan Wilayah Sandakan) --Cccefalon 04:05, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support There are maybe some slight CAs on the edge of the roof, but this problem is not severe. Please describe the "insufficiency" more accurate. --Hubertl 08:12, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Tsungam 13:59, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 20:30, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

File:SanAntoniodePadua-SantisimoSacramentoTandil.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Statue to San Antonio de Padua, Santísimo Sacramento church, Tandil, Argentina --Ezarate 22:43, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment It needs a better composition --Moroder 08:25, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done --Ezarate 20:40, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support I disagree, please give a better description what you mean with "insufficiency". The picture itself was still in discussion between two colleagues. --Hubertl 08:19, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support For me it is QI now --Moroder 07:53, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 20:30, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

File:Donaupark irissee izd tower.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Donaupark in Vienna, Austria. Iris Lake and IZD Tower.--Hendric Stattmann 20:06, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose I don´t really understand the strong noise with ISO 100. But therefore I cannot support it. --Hubertl 10:17, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support I think the noise is very minimal, and anyways this is a 18 MP image which is quite sharp even at 100%. --King of Hearts 00:53, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, but it is not really sharp - a weak decline --Michielverbeek 05:37, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support very sharp, there is a very little noise on the building likely because of a brightening of the shadows, but nothing really disturbing IMO. Visually a good image --Christian Ferrer 17:04, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support As for Christian. -- Smial 12:03, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 20:29, 15 April 2016 (UTC)