Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 26 2017

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:16-11-15-Bahnhof_Glasgow_Central-RR2_7046.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Glasgow Central railway station --Ralf Roletschek 23:30, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Most of the train unsharp --Ermell 08:39, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • O.k. But weak  Support as I think. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 22:52, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ermell. -- Ikan Kekek 22:24, 22 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Train is not only too unsharp but it also gives me the feeling I am looking in a dirty mirror, sorry --Michielverbeek 06:35, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose At the very least the front of the train needs to be sharp, and it isn't.--Peulle 07:30, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 12:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

File:Roses_House,_Avenida_Paulista,_Brazil.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination roses House, Avenida Paulista, Brazil --The Photographer 18:51, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Nice compositional idea, quality is acceptable to me. -- Ikan Kekek 22:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The strong noise should be removed IMO --Ermell 22:01, 20 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As per Ermell, --Cvmontuy 02:16, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Not a brilliant photo, but acceptable for me for Q1 --Michielverbeek 06:30, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support. I haven't looked at the image before NR but there's detail lost in the darker parts. --Basotxerri 16:45, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --A.Savin 17:28, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

File:ISDT_SC-608_front.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Battery charger for RC use --Lucasbosch 19:07, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality.not sharp sorry --Cvmontuy 19:28, 18 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. Probablby somewhat low DOF, but in all other aspects very good quality. --Smial 10:11, 19 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry but for Cvmontuy. For a studio work isn't enought for me --Livioandronico2013 13:07, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I must agree with the others; the DoF is too shallow and it's also a bit noisy.--Peulle 07:31, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 12:11, 25 January 2017 (UTC)

File:No_Parking_Sign_in_Bagni_di_Lucca_01.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination No Parking Sign at a door in Bagni di Lucca, Italy --Kritzolina 10:02, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Beautiful photograph, good quality. --Slashme 12:49, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now - please fix chromatic aberrations first. --A.Savin 18:15, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment Would you please indicate where are the CA? --Cvmontuy 13:06, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
On the borders between blue and white. --A.Savin 22:45, 21 January 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As per A.Savin, --Cvmontuy 17:39, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --A.Savin 17:27, 25 January 2017 (UTC)