Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 10 2018

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Nordkirchen,_Naturschutzgebiet_Ichterloh_--_2018_--_2314.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Nature reserve Ichterloh, Nordkirchen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 03:56, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Too much unsharpness. --Fischer.H 16:19, 2 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Comment IMO it's part of the composition. --XRay 04:40, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Strong  Support. There is a tiny spot of lens flare, which possibly could prevent FP-Status, but that is not really disturbing. In all other aspects great image. --Smial 11:00, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Please help me, I can't find the lens flare. There are some nice spider webs, but I can't find the lens flare. --XRay 07:14, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Oops, zooming in opened my eyes ;-) --Smial 21:43, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support I thought about this for a while and came down on the supporting side. I definitely see the potential problem of the DoF being too shallow, so I have no problem if people disagree with me, but I think in this case the scene allows for a deliberate use of shallow DoF as part of the composition. Something like this can be overdone, but I think this one is just within acceptable boundaries.--Peulle 11:23, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
 Comment With this special lighting both would work: shallow DOF as seen here, and also full detail from foreground to the background. But this would be different images, none better or worse than the other. --Smial 21:50, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 09:14, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Niche_in_the_belfry_in_Peyrusse-le-Roc.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Niche in the belfry in Peyrusse-le-Roc, Aveyron, France. --Tournasol7 06:49, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
    I removed a cat due to overcat and I miss a more specific one, quality is good, though Poco a poco 18:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Hi Tournasol7, the sign on the right suggests that the image is tilted. I would remove this sign, it's a bit disturbing. And one of the categories is wrong as this isn't a B&W image. Could you fix that? --Basotxerri 15:12, 27 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Sorry, but I can't do it. Tournasol7 13:53, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Thank you very much for Basotxerri for improving my photo. I will leave you to discuss. Tournasol7 21:54, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support - QI for me. -- Ikan Kekek 05:59, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Milseburg 14:16, 9 May 2018 (UTC)

File:Cercle_Saint-Martin,_Colmar.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Cercle_Saint-Martin_at_13_avenue_Joffre_in_Colmar_(Haut-Rhin,_France)._--Gzen92_10:27,_25_April_2018_(UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment Please add more sharpness. --Halavar 12:41, 25 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Support ok to me The Photographer Thu, 26 Apr 2018 01:51:26 GMT
  • Weak  Support - Not tack sharp, but IMO good enough. -- Ikan Kekek 07:45, 26 April 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Main part of the photo is not sharp enough --Michielverbeek 06:54, 28 April 2018 (UTC)
 Comment If I see right this picture is already QI. Why is nominated once more? -- Spurzem 19:16, 29 April 2018 (UTC)
Looks like you're right! What happened here? -- Ikan Kekek 02:05, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
@Gzen92: Please be carefull the next time before to nominate a picture allready QI. --The Photographer 23:57, 1 May 2018 (UTC)
* Oppose for formal reasons. @Gzen92: You should withdrawn this nomination. There is no need. --Milseburg 19:45, 3 May 2018 (UTC)
I do not understand too much, the proposed picture at 25 april does not have QI !? The first vote against came after the passing of the bot. Gzen92 [discuter] 13:12, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
Ok. I canceled my vote. This image wasn´t nominated twice. It seems to be a problem with the "Third Template Error" on April 26th 2:27 UTC. So it seems, that the promoted image went into CR or that it got the tag prematurely. I don´t know. --Milseburg (talk) 14:21, 4 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This not an image taken by a Wikimedian but this one comes from 'Panoramio' and connot be nominated as a 'Quality picture'--PJDespa 19:21, 5 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Good point mentioned. I hadn't noticed before. So I oppose again. --Milseburg (talk) 07:35, 6 May 2018 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per PJDespa. -- Ikan Kekek 07:55, 7 May 2018 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Milseburg 14:15, 9 May 2018 (UTC)