Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives April 07 2022

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Boat_Canal_Munroe_Island_Kerala_Mar22_A7C_01452.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Polled boat in canal, Munroe Island, Kerala --Tagooty 06:27, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose The focus doesn't seem to be on the people sitting in the boat, IMO. Also, the helmsman is behind the leaves. --Satdeep Gill 14:15, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
    The people are not the focus, it is the overall composition of a boat in the tree-shaded canal. --Tagooty 15:35, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose In my opinion, our attention is immediately drawn to the people. Opposed per Satdeep. -- Ikan Kekek 05:52, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As pointed out above. The left side is also leaning in a bit.--Peulle 09:46, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:25, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

File:Wiewiórka_pospolita,_Kraków,_20220315_0951_4444.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Red squirrel (Sciurus vulgaris) in Kraków --Jakubhal 16:25, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    easy to correct exposure for QI --Charlesjsharp 20:52, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
    ✓ Done New version uploaded --Jakubhal 16:17, 30 March 2022 (UTC)
    Ok, second looking at the picture, I don't think it was too dark (if that was the issue). I've reverted the change and I am waiting for other opinions. --Jakubhal 09:39, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Really cute and good quality to me. -- Ikan Kekek 05:55, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Five Mpixels seems a bit low to me, but the composition and lighting are quite appealing. --Smial 10:59, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 11:24, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

File:Ναός_Μεταμόρφωσης,_Παλαιοχώρα_Αίγινας_0945.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination The frescos in the interior of the church of Transfiguration in Palaiochora, Aegina. --C messier 20:34, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sorry. The candle holder is spoiling it for me --MB-one 21:22, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support The candle holder is not disturbing the composition in my personal opinion. The quality is good overall. Please discuss. --Lion-hearted85 23:16, 2 Apr 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support I would second Lion-hearted85’s view. --Aristeas 10:13, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Fine photo to me and not questionable at all. -- Ikan Kekek 19:46, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The flash spoils it. --Smial 23:02, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 08:18, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

File:Sandbank._Eriyadu,_Maldives.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Sandbank. Eriyadu, Maldives --Ввласенко 05:37, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose There's a dust spot, but in addition, nothing is sharp. If you'd like to eliminate the dust spot and change the status to "Discuss," be my guest. It is an appealing scene for sure. -- Ikan Kekek 07:26, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Thank you! I removed the dust and reduced the size so that the unsharpness is less visible.-- Ввласенко 09:37, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
     Comment There is a specific guideline against downsampling just to make something look sharper. -- Ikan Kekek 18:28, 2 April 2022 (UTC)
     Comment Well, then the photo is not suitable for IQ. I thank you for your attention. -- Ввласенко 06:33, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Comment Das Foto in Originalauflösung ist ausreichend scharf. Ein Teil des Unschärfeeinducks entsteht durch unvermeidbare atmosphärische Effekte, ein Teil durch motivbedingt relativ niedrige lokale Kontraste. Die Größenreduzierung war völlig unnötig. --Smial 21:24, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per the author. --Peulle 09:44, 4 April 2022 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 11:24, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

File:Стара_вежа_(Маріуполь).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Old city watertower, Mariupol. By User:Oleksandr Malyon --Anntinomy 12:01, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality --Matutinho 12:59, 28 March 2022 (UTC)
     Oppose Perspective should be corrected --Ermell 09:17, 29 March 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Good for me -- Spurzem 12:50, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Aerial photographs do not necessarily require perspective correction. To me, the representation looks very natural. Lighting, exposure and sharpness are ok. --Smial 23:18, 1 April 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose IMO the right part does not look natural, it is hanging to the right. --Michielverbeek 04:20, 3 April 2022 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 08:17, 6 April 2022 (UTC)