Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives May 14 2016

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Bert_-_Mary_Poppins_-_20150805_17h50_(11034).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Bert in Mary Poppins in the Disney Magic On Parade at Disneyland Paris. -- Medium69 20:34, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality --Halavar 21:28, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree: Cutting the persons feet is a compositional issue. --Cccefalon 04:08, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose as Cccefalon. --Hubertl 06:58, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Agree with the others. --Peulle 13:10, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 20:02, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Charleroi_-_Bicentenaire_de_la_bataille_de_Waterloo_-_72.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Charleroi (Belgique) - Commémoration des Cent-Jours, de la campagne de Belgique et de la Bataille de Waterloo le 6 juin 2015. --Jmh2o 18:29, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 20:37, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree: The man's left shoe is cut. Such unfortunate crop can't be QI. --Cccefalon 04:11, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Are you serious? for a shoe? --Livioandronico2013 06:29, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  • More than serious. This is the simple difference between a snapshot and a QI. --Cccefalon 12:39, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It´s not because of the shoe, it´s because of no shoe. Wide angle by walking back just half a meter! It´s a typical problem you can see with some photographers, they are just looking at the center while ignoring the edges. You can make a half portrait, a 2/3 portrait - but cutting the feets is a mess. --Hubertl 06:55, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree with Hubert and Cccefalon. I also think the photo is too dark or it contains too many shadow-parts; it was not a good idea to take such a photo under the trees --Michielverbeek 07:27, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment merci pour vos remarques et commentaires. --Jmh2o 15:26, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment Oui, je vous compris. I am learning by making mistakes; sometimes I make too many mistakes --Michielverbeek 05:25, 12 May 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 07:59, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Perros-Guirec - Pointe du Sémaphore (vue sur Trestrignel).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Cape of the sémaphore in Perros-Guirec --Kev22 09:35, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Pudelek 08:48, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
    Yes, now I see --Pudelek 14:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I disagree. Unsharp, chromatic aberrations, dust spots --A.Savin 11:58, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree with Savin; there are several issues with the sky, including the spots noted. --Peulle 13:13, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 20:03, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Femme_en_rose,_jardin_d'été_à_Saint-Pétersbourg.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination Woman in pink, Summer garden, Saint-Petersburg --Reda Kerbouche 05:30, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment I can see some CAs in the upper right corner, perhaps they can be reduced, although they are not very significant. --Basotxerri 06:57, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
✓ Done i think it is ok now ?--Reda Kerbouche 06:10, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
      •  Comment I'm very sorry, I can't see any difference, have you uploaded the correct image? Do you see the blueish borders on the leaves? --Basotxerri 07:50, 10 May 2016 (UTC);
        •  Comment see it now.--Reda Kerbouche 08:13, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
          •  Comment I am not sure if this if sufficient for QI, so I would like to have other opinions in CR. --Basotxerri 15:37, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
            •  Comment @Reda Kerbouche: Perhaps I'm wrong but it seems to me that your tool (Gimp?) is not the best way to eliminate CAs. In Lightroom for example this would be quite easy. --Basotxerri 15:37, 10 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support, the main object has slight overexposure, the small blue margins in the blurred background are not really disturning. The image is sharp, well composed, and has nice lighting. -- Smial 08:12, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak  Support from me too - the lighting could be better, but the subject matter (the statue) is generally quite well captured. --Peulle 13:17, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 20:04, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

File:Branta_canadensis_(Bernache_du_Canada)_-_20150806_13h11_(11044).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Branta canadensis (Canada goose) in Rambouillet, France. -- Medium69 11:29, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Peulle 15:21, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose IMHO, too purple-blueish (see the white parts). Please discuss. --C messier 09:02, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
@C messier: I fixed the white balance. --Medium69 22:06, 9 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Acceptable now. -- Smial 10:37, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Better now. --C messier 09:42, 11 May 2016 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 08:01, 13 May 2016 (UTC)