Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 14 2020

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Life_on_a_wheel.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Pottery maker doing his work. By User:Arjit Chowdhury --RockyMasum 10:12, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose head cropped --Charlesjsharp 10:56, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. I think the crop of the head and the work on the bottom was made intentionally. Apart from that the composition and the framing looks really pleasing to me. --Granada 11:07, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I think this framing works, given that both the bottom and top crop are tight. I will support when (and only when) the file name is changed into something more meaningful.--Peulle 09:38, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek 10:04, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  OpposeThe file name does not bother me, but the image description should contain a meaningful description of the location. Also: Is this a craftsman working individually? Part of a larger company? --Smial 14:39, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 07:54, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

File:Iglesia_de_San_Luis,_Múnich,_Alemania,_2012-04-30,_DD_03.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination: Church of St. Ludwig, Munich, Germany --Poco a poco 08:10, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Support Good quality. --Tournasol7 09:23, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree, perspective seems overdone to me. Please discuss. --Domob 17:48, 3 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support o.k. for me.--Ermell 07:36, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I rarely oppose, but I know this church and care about it - this perspective just looks wrong to me. --Kritzolina 11:32, 4 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment If you look at the photo from a purely technical point of view of geometric optics, the result is largely correct. Unfortunately, like many others that have been compulsively verticalised, the picture does not correspond to the visual impression on site and is an aesthetic total loss. I am sorry to say that especially with this photo. One could write the same comments on hundreds of other photos on QIC, all of which fell victim to the dogma that verticals in architectural photography must always be shown vertically in the photo, because after all, the architect didn't draw sloping walls. In doing so it is deliberately and stupidly ignored that the architect can freely choose the perspective in his drawings, but the photographer cannot. --Smial 00:05, 5 January 2020 (UTC) Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator (free version)
  •  Support Reaches cleraly QI level in my eyes. --Milseburg 14:21, 8 January 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, but this perspective makes it too unnatural. The tower on the right is much too high in comparison to the left one. --Palauenc05 12:25, 9 January 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 07:54, 13 January 2020 (UTC)