Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 02 2016

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Puerta_en_Alte_Bergstrasse,_Landshut,_Alemania,_2012-05-27,_DD_02.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Altstadt St., Landshut, Germany --Poco a poco 11:51, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Significant CAs at the leaves of the trees --Uoaei1 13:36, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Ermell 15:59, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose CAs need to be removed. --Uoaei1 17:04, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
    • ✓ Fixed Poco a poco 17:28, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
      •  Support Ok now --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:02, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support --Jacek Halicki 20:13, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Spurzem 20:00, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 04:48, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Euthalia aconthea-Kadavoor-2016-06-25-003.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Euthalia aconthea-Kadavoor --Jkadavoor 10:22, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment are you sure, that this is a good composition? --Hubertl 10:54, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
    •  Comment There is some distracting object just behind the butterfly; so nothing more I can include below. Here what important is I got his green proboscis. I've better image without it. Jkadavoor 13:13, 25 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose I better send it to CR. --Hubertl 16:03, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support I actually like this daring and unusual composition! All butterflies don't have to be smack in the middle of the pic. It looks like he's on a runway ready to take off (even if he isn't). W.carter 20:13, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
  • "It flies with stiff wing beats and often glides. The wing is not flapped very far below the horizontal." :) Jkadavoor 05:07, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment Why not just crop it? Resolution's high enough. --Peulle 11:03, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Is there really a rule that all picures in one category must have the same layout and crop? Why can't some pictures be different? I like the small green plants along the right side and I think they add an element to the pic. W.carter 13:41, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment New version by Iifar uploaded (same crop though). Jkadavoor 11:48, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 04:44, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Erwin_Schrödinger_(1887-1961),_Nr._112,_bust_(marble)_in_the_Arkadenhof_of_the_University_of_Vienna-2954.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Erwin Schrödinger (1887-1961), bust (marble) in the Arkadenhof of the University of Vienna --Hubertl 06:53, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Voting against this one; it's a nice detail image, but when depicting a bust the composition is too aggressive here IMO. Large parts of the bust have been excluded from the image and at the very least the whole head should have been in. --Peulle 06:59, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support This is QI for me. What´s wront with a detail of a head? --Ermell 07:22, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment I also disagree. It´s absolute intentional to get different abstractions of these busts. And in fact, it is not true, that a picture of a bust has to show the complete bust. --Hubertl 07:25, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
 Comment Given that the description says "bust" and not "detail", I see it differently. But CR will tell. --Peulle 07:42, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support --Jacek Halicki 08:21, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Nothing wrong for me with an other detail of the bust --Moroder 12:03, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO OK. --XRay 17:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment How appropriate that there is some doubt about whether this one is QI or not! ;) W.carter 18:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Of course I think this is ok! Why on earth could we not have a portrait-like photo of a bust. This makes it even more interesting than seing the whole head or bust. If the "detail" or "part of" should be mandatory in every file description to pass QI, we would have to decline about 90% of all the pics here of parts of churches, statues, towns, flowers, etc. W.carter 11:59, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Spurzem 20:01, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 04:45, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Insecto polinizando.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Insect in flowers pollinating -- Ivan2010 (talk) 13:31, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Hubertl 13:49, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, wich insect?, wich flowers? Can you determine something for the photo to be helpful? Not QI for me without description, sorry--Lmbuga 20:38, 26 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality.--Palauenc05 21:17, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 19:13, 1 September 2016 (UTC)