Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 16 2016

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Harbour_of_Castro_Urdiales.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Harbour of Castro Urdiales in Cantabria, Spain. Church of Santa María de la Asunción and lighthouse in Castle of Santa Ana at the background. --ElBute 15:38, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --Zcebeci 15:56, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
     Oppose Too noisy IMHO, please, let's discuss --Poco a poco 19:22, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
     Support Not perfect, but QI IMO: 5,472 × 3,648 pixels--Lmbuga 05:01, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 06:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Beerot Khan, Ramon Crater - Israel.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Beerot Khan- camping site in the Ramon Crater (Makhtesh Ramon- Dark-sky preserves), Israel --MinoZig 12:56, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment It's a night pic so a bit of noise is allowed, but the buildings could use at least some perspective correction. W.carter 20:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
    •  Comment W.carter, its a modern desert bedouin tent, not a building.מינוזיג 15:14, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
      •  Comment :) Not referring to the bedou tent, I've been in those and know what they look like, I was thinking about the stone structures on the right, they look a little askew. W.carter 17:18, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
        Think I'd like a third opinion here though. W.carter 13:19, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
        •  Comment @W.carter: : A comment is a comment, a decline is a decline, a promotion is a promotion. Why do you sent this image to CR? So I have some more work to do? --Hubertl 08:24, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
          •  Comment @Hubertl: It was certainly not to give you more work, I sincerely apologize for that. I thought a discussion was in order if things were a bit unclear about how to judge an image. Now I know better and will not do so again. Again, sorry for adding to your work, it was not my intention. W.carter 08:32, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Improvable, noise. Nice, but not QI IMO--Lmbuga 04:59, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 06:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Pfarrkirche Schöngrabern, Figuren an der Apsis-5950.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Romanesque figures (13th Century) at the outside of the apsis of the parish Church Schöngrabern, Lower Austria. By User:Kellergassen Niederösterreich 2016 --Isiwal 19:08, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment Too few space on left, could you improve the crop? --Ezarate 20:51, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment yes, I tried, Ezarate. Thanks for reviewing --Kellergassen Niederösterreich 2016 22:13, 29 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose The crop is too tight, but I like to see another opinions Ezarate 14:16, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
    • ?? At first you waited 11 (sic!) days for your response, now you have the same argument. I changed it (because of the tight crop), but there is no chance to do: "what?" Maybe a full picture of the Apsis is the solution? A satellite view? I don´t get it really!! --Kellergassen Niederösterreich 2016 05:53, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
  • I do not understand clearly what you say, but only there are one version of the picture.  Support In any case QI IMO--Lmbuga 04:04, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 06:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Keeled_skimmer_(Orthetrum_coerulescens)_mature_female.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Keeled skimmer (Orthetrum coerulescens) mature female, Crockford Stream, Hampshire --Charlesjsharp 09:12, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Nice picture but it is with 1,43 MB under the guideline with 2 MB --Verum 21:46, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
    •  Comment Please @Verum: read the guidelines carefully. MB not the same as MP. This image has 5.6 MP. Charlesjsharp 23:24, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support as before, the image is big enough and good for QI --Hubertl 08:11, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support per Hubertl, MP is megapixel, while MB is megabyte. There are some pictures that are 2 megabytes large but lower than 2 megapixels. An example of this is a large SVG. --Pokéfan95 08:19, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Good composition, but, sorry, DOF somewhat too small and focus not optimal. The right wings are ok, the body not. Nearly 6 MPix is ok of course. -- Smial 08:43, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose As Smial--Lmbuga 05:08, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 06:03, 15 August 2016 (UTC)