Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 26 2020

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Golden_Gate_bridge_3.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Golden Gate bridge Sebring12Hrs 12:00, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Ok, slightly dark? --ArildV 12:16, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  OpposeDue to the fog, a large part of the bridge cannot be seen and therefore cannot be assessed. --Fischer.H 16:58, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. You think pictures of the San Francisco Bay Area in fog should be per se ineligible for QI consideration? No offense, but that's ridiculous! -- Ikan Kekek 03:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Nice and typical view. The dark parts could be a little bit brighter. --XRay 05:50, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --Palauenc05 09:27, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Interesting image and good quality! -- Spurzem 12:24, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --Jakubhal 19:23, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 22:09, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Сорокина_А.А._Белая_трясогузка_на_Верхнеяузском_болоте.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Motacilla alba in Losinyy Ostrov National Park, Moscow, by User:Annie wild life --Ludvig14 09:27, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support! Nice and good quality -- Spurzem 09:54, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree.Sharpness is not good enough on the head --Zcebeci 10:30, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Seven Pandas 13:05, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support ok for me.--Ermell 06:43, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --Palauenc05 09:28, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support --GRDN711 00:14, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 22:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)

File:INN_Thar.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination A single leg rower with a fishing net at Inle Lake, Myanmar (by User:Mrsoethuaung) --Ninjastrikers 13:59, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --GRDN711 14:46, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --GRDN711 14:47, 20 July 2020 (UTC) Sorry - did not intend two support statements. --GRDN711 19:42, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry to disagree, but the fisherman face is noised and the whole picture lacks detail. --Jakubhal 19:37, 20 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Jakubhal (had you meant to oppose, too?), and in addition to what he said, there's also chromatic aberration, for example on his pants. -- Ikan Kekek 06:29, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment This image illustrates the subject well. The technical issues of noise and CAs might be overcome by re-working the image from the original in Photoshop or NeatImage rather than Snapseed. --GRDN711 20:01, 21 July 2020 (UTC)
    • I agree it is an interesting shot, but technically this file is weak. We are discussing the current state, not potential. The face and other details missing due to strong compression cannot be recreated without RAW file. You may ask the author if he can fix it, then we can discuss new version. --Jakubhal 06:40, 22 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Regretful  Oppose A funny scene, I'd like to support it, however, too many technical issues for a QI. --Palauenc05 09:33, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose +1.--Peulle 10:03, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 22:08, 25 July 2020 (UTC)