Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 27 2014

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Bignor Roman Villa MMB 13.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Bignor Roman villa. Mattbuck 06:55, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose - Do you think that it is our job to preselect your photos??? Not QI at all! --Hubertl 08:00, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
    Hubertl, I'd appreciate it if you would show some good faith. I do preselect my photos, I have a big list of those which need nomination. When I upload, I add to the list those images I think might be QI. I thought this one might be QI. Honestly it was a borderline case - this isn't one of my best photos, but QI was never about "best" photos. This to me would not be a clear decline, though it wouldn't be an obvious promote either. I welcome constructive criticism, such as Jebulon's below. But saying "Not QI at all" is not really helpful to anyone. If you told me what was wrong, perhaps I could fix it. Mattbuck 17:58, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support Could be sharper and get a bit more of contrast but QI for me. Hubertl, keep in mind that Mattbuck somehow appreciates the detail :-) --Kreuzschnabel 09:05, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Composition. Symmetry is necessary for a symmetrical subject, IMO. --Jebulon 18:04, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Hubertl's comment indeed comes across a bit too harsh, but I agree that this image does not stand out from random tourist snapshots in any way. And to be honest, the author has been making a lot of QI nominations. Maybe not enough to call it flooding, but still, more rigorous preselection on his part would be appreciated. --Yerpo 09:23, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
    Even the King of QI, Poco a poco, gets images declined fairly regularly. I nominate ones I think are QI, and ones I think might be. Sometimes non-QI-worthy images slip through the gaps, but given that roughly 75% of my nominations get promoted (averaging 4.94 per day this year, counting days when I didn't nominate any which is probably about 2 weeks total brings this to 5.22 per day or 74.6% of my nominations) I don't think there's any reason for me to change the way I've been doing things. Mattbuck 09:59, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the royal title :) I guess that my rate is about 85-90%, though. Poco a poco 15:52, 26 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Nowhere really sharp. Dull colours due to inappropriate lighting. -- Smial 13:21, 25 October 2014 (UTC)

File:2014_Lądek-Zdrój,_rynek_03.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Market Square in Lądek-Zdrój 2 --Jacek Halicki 21:50, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Promotion Too strong shadow in the foreground for me. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 22:44, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Question Can you brighten the shadow area (or black level) a bit? --Hockei (talk) 15:03, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
✓ Done--Jacek Halicki 22:44, 19 October 2014 (UTC)
 Support Good, for me QI. --Hockei 17:49, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support Good for me now. --Hubertl 11:18, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Bayon,_Angkor_Thom,_Camboya,_2013-08-16,_DD_27.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Documentation work at Bayon, Angkor Thom, Cambodia --Poco a poco 18:17, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Insufficient focus. Above all, the person is disruptive behind the statue. --Steindy 20:06, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support Sharpness should be better but it is enough for me. The image is an impressive document of the painter. Please diskuss. -- Spurzem 10:04, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
    ✓ New version with increased sharpening Poco a poco 15:59, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. Yann 17:20, 20 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unfortunately, the main subjekt should be sharp enough but it isn't IMO. --Hockei 20:10, 21 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support Sharpness not perfect, but acceptable. Nice documentation. -- Smial 14:11, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Bettingen_-_Fernsehturm_St._Chrischona_-_Tag_der_offenen_Tür3.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: TV Tower St. Chrischona --Taxiarchos228 05:57, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
    Could you crop/paint out that little blue thing at the bottom left? Mattbuck 16:07, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Review  Not done --Mattbuck 21:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
     Support. The "little blue thing" can not be a reason to decline a very good image. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 22:29, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Castle Combe Circuit MMB C7 Castle Combe Saloon Car Championship.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Saloon car racing at Castle Combe. Mattbuck 07:08, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Comment QI? The main object is not very sharp. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 11:05, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
    • was this a opposing vote? --LC-de 09:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support focus is on the car, it's ok IMO, in more weather conditions were not the best. --Christian Ferrer 10:43, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose. I know better images of racing cars which were declined. Therefore no QI for me. Sorry. -- Spurzem 22:55, 17 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Spurzem --Livioandronico2013 00:34, 18 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Nothing really sharp. For a racing photo the main subject is way too small depicted. For an overview of the location it is way too unsharp. -- Smial 12:25, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --LC-de 09:00, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

File:London MMB »0D4 City Canal.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Reflections in the City Canal. Mattbuck 09:05, 5 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Decline
  • Color noise at right especially at bottom --Christian Ferrer 17:19, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Mattbuck 17:49, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Missing sharpness. I can only detect a narrow sharp area in the lower third of the photo with the best intentions. --Steindy 23:47, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Support sharp enough IMO --Christian Ferrer 04:39, 16 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose For me the word "sharp" is totally absent here --Livioandronico2013 12:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   --Livioandronico2013 12:31, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

File:Bettingen_-_Fernsehturm_St._Chrischona_-_Tag_der_offenen_Tür16.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination TV Tower St. Chrischona, view to Rührberg --Taxiarchos228 05:55, 6 October 2014 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Pleclown 16:43, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose until a more accurate description --Christian Ferrer 18:08, 14 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Christian. Mattbuck 18:11, 23 October 2014 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others --Livioandronico2013 11:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Livioandronico2013 11:11, 24 October 2014 (UTC)