Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 26 2020

• 
  • Nomination Palazzo Sigismondi entrance. --Moroder 01:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Crossroads in Brescia. --Moroder 01:46, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Cannon on the east side of Örebro Castle --Liberaler Humanist 22:58, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. Please skip a line between nominations. -- Ikan Kekek 00:06, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 12 cm Kanon m-85 at Vaxholm Castle. --Liberaler Humanist 22:58, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 00:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Mercedes-Benz X-Class at Tuning World Bodensee 2018 --MB-one 21:56, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Michielverbeek 22:56, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Railway station Štrba, Slovakia --MIGORMCZ 20:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --MB-one 21:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination SK Class 420.95 --MIGORMCZ 20:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. Description in English would be great. --Tournasol7 21:02, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination SK Class 405.95 at railway station Štrbské Pleso --MIGORMCZ 20:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Looks good. -- Liberaler Humanist 01:07, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Kaufstrasse 22 in Weimar (by Tournasol7) --Sebring12Hrs 18:40, 23 December (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Michielverbeek 20:07, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Porte Dauphine of the Citadel of Lille, France --Velvet 12:20, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:31, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Alluaudia procera, Tallinn Botanic Garden, Estonia --Poco a poco 12:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:42, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Cuernos del Paine, Torres del Paine National Park, Chile --Poco a poco 12:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:43, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Great Temple, Petra, Jordan --Poco a poco 12:10, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 16:43, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Weil der Stadt, Germany: view of a part of the old city wall with the Sailerturm in the blue hour. --Aristeas 10:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 11:03, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dörzbach, Germany: view of the old Jewish cemetery near Hohebach, view from south. --Aristeas 10:15, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 11:03, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dandelion meadow at Michelsberg Forest near Bischberg --Ermell 08:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Fitindia 08:38, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Botenlauben castle ruins in Bad Kissingen, north side. --Ermell 08:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Michielverbeek 09:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ebensfeld station with DBAG Class 641 looking north --Ermell 08:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 10:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Wayside shrine in Reiterswiesen, Stöcke --Ermell 08:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support GQ --Palauenc05 08:53, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination egg of Atlantic puffin, spp arctica - Oeufs de Macareux moine, ssp arctica --Ercé 08:32, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 10:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion {{{2}}}
• 
  • Nomination Vintage Cars in Mumbai. ----Fitindia 08:29, 23 December 2020 (UTC)Gzen92 07:21, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Bad crop on the right, missing information about the model or even the car maker (Plymouth), lacks perspecpective correction --Poco a poco 12:40, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bell tower of the Saint Baudilus church in Nîmes, Gard, France. --Tournasol7 07:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 08:39, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Frieze over the door of the Hôtel Villard in Nîmes, Gard,France. --Tournasol7 07:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 08:39, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Portal of the building at 19 Rue Dorée in Nîmes, Gard, France. --Tournasol7 07:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Ermell 08:39, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Capital of the palister of the portal of the Hôtel de l'Académie in Nîmes, Gard, France. --Tournasol7 07:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:46, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Statue of Augustus in Nîmes, Gard, France. --Tournasol7 07:16, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 12:46, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Shell of a Nodose Purpura, Thais nodosa --Llez 05:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 06:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Piptoporus betulinus on a dead birch in development. Focus stack of 15 photos.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 05:41, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 05:43, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Nature reserve Petgatten De Feanhoop. View of the petgatten.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 05:41, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 05:43, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Purau Bay, Canterbury --Podzemnik 01:22, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Purau Bay, Canterbury --Podzemnik 01:22, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 05:36, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Sarcophagus of the bishop Berardo Maggi AD 1308. --Moroder 00:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --XRay 06:35, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
     Oppose Stitching(?) mistake on the lower frieze --Borvan53 18:25, 25 December (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Krudttårnet, Frederikshavn --Liberaler Humanist 21:04, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. I assume that the walls of the building are not 100% vertical in reality. --Aristeas 10:18, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Frederikshavn Kirke, Frederikshavn --Liberaler Humanist 21:04, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Top crop too tight. Sorry. --Ermell 08:44, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Fields in the vicinity of Córdoba, Andalucía, Spain. --Kallerna 10:38, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Fischer.H 10:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Córdoba Airport. --Kallerna 10:33, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Fischer.H 10:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Truc de Saint-Bonnet-de-Chirac in commune (942 m) of Saint-Bonnet-de-Chirac, Lozère, France. --Tournasol7 06:51, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Main object out of focus. --Augustgeyler 21:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Water reservoir near Baden hut. The little lake is filled by the Mullwitzkees. The Kristallwand mountain in the background. --Tesla Delacroix 18:10, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 21:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Nyhavn 11 and 13 with a sailboat. --Liberaler Humanist 21:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 21:59, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Gravestone of the Jespersen family, Almen Kirkegård, Aalborg --Liberaler Humanist 21:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review
    Description is broken, can you please fix that? Geotag would be useful --Podzemnik 01:49, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Monument for fallen soldiers of the Second Schleswig War, Almen Kirkegård, Aalborg --Liberaler Humanist 21:45, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Basilica of Nuestra Señora de los Milagros, Ágreda, Spain --Poco a poco 12:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Ferry terminal, Batam, Indonesia --Poco a poco 12:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Bavarian State Office, Munich, Germany --Poco a poco 12:13, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Eurocopter Dauphin in the German Federal Police at AERO Friedrichshafen 2018 --MB-one 10:02, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Feldwebel-Schmid-Kaserne, Rendsburg --MB-one 10:02, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Memorial cross. Glades. Functional and historical complex of the Uusikirkko Lutheran Church. Lutheran Cemetery --Александр Байдуков 07:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review
    Are you able to restore some of the blown highlights? --Augustgeyler 15:08, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Kronshtadt. Mass military burial and graves of Soviet Army soldiers who died during the great Patriotic war --Александр Байдуков 07:12, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Monument in Scherwiller (Bas-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 07:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Monument to Jean de Lattre de Tassigny in Sélestat (Bas-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 07:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Ebersheim Gate (Untertor) in Dambach-la-Ville (Bas-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 07:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Ebersheim Gate (Untertor) in Dambach-la-Ville (Bas-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 07:04, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Graves at the western middle section of Lindholm Høje, Aalborg. --Liberaler Humanist 22:14, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review
    The dust spot in the sky at the right side should be removed. --Ermell 08:23, 17 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination View of Karoti, Crete. --C messier 15:27, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 17:09, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Statue on the frontage of Oriel & Hardie House, Bootle of a loving elderly couple. --Rodhullandemu 11:50, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Question A nice sculpture (although two feet are missing), but what are the functions of the chain and the cable? --Palauenc05 22:36, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
    I suspect the chain is to secure the statue so it doesn't fall forwards and break. The cable, I believe is an insensitive intrusion to an otherwise sensitive emotion. Sadly, the house is not mine so I can't control how the sculpture is displayed. But I think what matters here is the quality of the photography rather than the limitations of the subject, which is something we have to fight against here on a daily basis. Up to you to decide whether we should be good at depicting what exists or only depict "good things". Rodhullandemu 23:19, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
    Dear Rodhullandemu, it may happen that distracting elements cannot be removed. It happens to me all the time that I see nice motifs with annoying stuff around. But then, the question is, if it makes sense to apply for the QI label. IMO it doesn't. On the other hand, I really don't care. If someone supports it, I won't oppose. --Palauenc05 08:41, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
    Ww can't always choose our subjects. For example File:St Mary's Church, Upton 2018.jpg is a QI despite the street lamp in front of it. But If we're going to be that picky, this page should be virtually empty. Rodhullandemu 09:00, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
     Support Well, IMHO Commons is a place for documentary photograph, and because the cable etc. are permanently attached to the statue and do not hide important parts of the state, the photo is good for me. --Aristeas 10:35, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 'And Life Is Over There' by Femmy Otten, in Kalvermarkt, The Hague, NL --Trougnouf 11:11, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 02:05, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Public garden in Luxembourg City. --Cayambe 10:01, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 01:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination St Nicholas church in Pin, commune of Bourgs sur Colagne, Lozère, France. --Tournasol7 08:35, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 01:54, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The tower complex at Pagalochori, Rethymno, Crete. --C messier 21:02, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 01:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The central square of Gonia, Rethymno, Crete. --C messier 21:02, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Moroder 01:50, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hotel L'Arbre Voyageur, Lille, France --Velvet 08:04, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 10:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Via Trieste Via Veronica Gambara streets in Brescia. --Moroder 05:06, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 10:33, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Hunting lodge (Herrenhaus) in Colmar (Haut-Rhin, France). --Gzen92 08:08, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
  • Review
    Tilted ccw. Colours dull compared to the next candidate of same scene. Sharpness is borderline. --Tagooty 09:27, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
     Done It should be better. Gzen92 09:22, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
    Except for cropping of the grass in the fg, I don't see noticeable improvement in tilt or colours. --Tagooty 13:34, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
    Excuse me, the house is more vertical on the right, I increased the contrast. For me it is visible but I would understand that it is not enough. Gzen92 07:19, 17 December 2020 (UTC)

Consensual review

File:Gerollte_Katze_20201104_DSC5446.jpg

• Nomination Rolled cat (with head on couch). --PantheraLeo1359531 16:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support Good quality. --Trougnouf 22:54, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose Low DOF for an easy to take picture. Except for its head, most of the animal is unsharp. --Palauenc05 10:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support I consider this as kind of an environmental portrait, and in portrait photography low DoF is very common and often wanted (only at least one eye must be sharp); therefore the low DoF is IMHO a valid choice here. --Aristeas 10:24, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 21:46, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Entspannt_zur_Seite_guckende_Katze_20201104_DSC5436.jpg

• Nomination Cat with relaxed view to the right. --PantheraLeo1359531 16:16, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Question What is the point of submitting several almost-duplicates? Where is the notability? Commons is not a hosting space for your private photo albums, no? --A.Savin 17:33, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment I have to disagree. The facial expressions says much about a cat. Having eyes open or almost closed makes a huge difference. Many factors are needed for creating facial expressions, these images show some results. If I would see this as a hosting space for private photo albums, it would be Very different. I don't recommend assumptions like these --PantheraLeo1359531 08:02, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support The head is sharp enough for this to be good quality, regardless of anything else that's in the photo. And portrait subjects don't need to be notable. A.Savin, feel free to move this to CR if you think there's a basis in the QI guidelines for declining this nomination. -- Ikan Kekek 19:20, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose Low DOF for an easy to take picture. Except for its head, most of the animal is unsharp. --Palauenc05 10:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support I consider this as kind of an environmental portrait, and in portrait photography low DoF is very common and often wanted (only at least one eye must be sharp); therefore the low DoF is IMHO a valid choice here. --Aristeas 10:23, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose Still not convinced about usefulness. Uploading tons of similar cats' images on Commons, despite the fact that we already have "tons of tons" of, is not cool. Noiminating them all at QI is not cool either. It's like uploading more and more human penis photos, just more aesthetic. Please find a more needed motif for capturing. --A.Savin 16:05, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose Several QIs of the same cat, same setting. Agree with A.Savin, we do not need more QIs of the same subject. --Kallerna 17:30, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Question Is the Commons server nearing its usable space, such that more cat photos will break it? I thought the entire idea of QIC was that all good photos are passed, regardless of how many there are per motif and how similar they are to other photos (with a few exceptions, but cat portraits certainly don't seem to be among them, unless you'd like to cite some relevant language - I'd be happy to consider that). I'd suggest that people bored with cat photos stop looking at them and leave it to other people to judge whether they meet the QIC criteria. As a practical matter, if no-one is interested enough in looking at them, they'll end up being undecided and therefore not passed. -- Ikan Kekek 22:34, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 21:47, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Brooklin_Bridge-Nueva_York7083.JPG

• Nomination Brooklyn Bridge at dusk, New York, USA --Poco a poco 14:26, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Support OK, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek 15:46, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sharpness, size, noisy. --Kallerna 18:36, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
  How big do you want a 2007 photo to be? As for the rest, I don't think pinpoint sharpness is necessary for this kind of atmospheric photo, but we can agree to disagree. -- Ikan Kekek 19:16, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Comment Do we have different standards for older pics? --Kallerna 22:05, 21 December 2020 (UTC)

• Yes. -- Ikan Kekek 02:39, 22 December 2020 (UTC)
• To elaborate: I tried to find the relevant text that states this. Someone showed it to me some time ago, but I can't find it, so I'd ask anyone who knows where it is to please link the text that states that we need to judge each photo in terms of whether it was a QI by the standards of the year when it was taken. -- Ikan Kekek 05:05, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

• Just for comparison, here is another digital image from 2007 taken during the dusk. --Kallerna 06:42, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

• That's a sneaky comparison of an image stitched together from multiples frames using a panorama head. Do you expect everybody to have done something like that back then to get a QI? Come on, you are starting to piss me off. I could also post here QIs (which don't necessarily have to be also FP, as well) that are of clearly worse quality than this one. Would I make then a point? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Poco a poco (talk • contribs) 12:30, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

• I'm not aware of any explicite agreements on standards over the time, it's just something obvious to me. I believe that the standard was implicitly set by the average quality of photography equipment. To make clear that standards are different for older pics, doesn't it apply to historic images?. Ikan, why don't you look into the QICs back from August 2007? You can get a more accurate feeling whether this image would have made it or not. --Poco a poco 12:31, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment No, it's not at all obvious. At FPC, there's a strong consensus not to have different standards for older digital photos, as witness delisting of photos that were considered excellent in their day. I hope you, A.Savin and others contribute to the thread I just started on the talk page, because it's not clear to me whether we should apply different standards to older photos at QIC, but I'm certainly not going to spend time trawling through QIC pages from 2007. -- Ikan Kekek 16:25, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Oppose per Kallerna. --A.Savin 18:23, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

  And I don't think we have different standards for old images: for QI certainly not (AFAIK), for an FP nomination anyone is of course free to say "this is a historical picture, the wow outweighs technical flaws"... or the like... --A.Savin 18:25, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment OK, I'm confused and will start a thread on the talk page. I'm happy to either have different standards for older photos or not have them, and older digital pictures certainly don't get judged at a different standard at FPC though early analog photos do. I just want to know what basis I should use in judging photos here. -- Ikan Kekek 16:04, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Comment Based on the discussion on the talk page, I think I probably should not apply different standards on sharpness and noise to a photo taken in 2007, so I've crossed out my supporting vote. I think the fuzzy buildings in the distance are probably OK for an atmospheric sunset pic, but the nearby people and so forth are also fuzzy. -- Ikan Kekek 21:20, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 21:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)

File:Entspannt_zum_Betrachter_guckende_Katze_20201104_DSC5433.jpg

• Nomination Image of a relaxing cat. --PantheraLeo1359531 15:25, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose This one is missing some depth of focus (needs a smaller aperture); only one eye is in focus. --Trougnouf 22:51, 20 December 2020 (UTC)

   Neutral per Ikan; larger focus would be appreciated but it's not enough to decline at reasonable zoom level. --Trougnouf 10:03, 22 December 2020 (UTC)

•  Support The head is sharp enough, especially considering the size of the file. -- Ikan Kekek 19:22, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
•  Support I consider this as kind of an environmental portrait, and in portrait photography low DoF is very common and often wanted (only at least one eye must be sharp); therefore I think this photo is OK. --Aristeas 10:27, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 21:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC)