Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives October 18 2022

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:File,_Asuán,_Egipto,_2022-04-01,_DD_122.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Temple of Isis in Philae, Aswan, Egypt --Poco a poco 11:17, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Oppose Nice image, but the text is really faded. --SHB2000 11:43, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
     Support IMO it is OK. I think there isn't more too see. --XRay 16:11, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
     Support Type of stone could be added if known.--Ermell 08:09, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
     Support Per others. --Sebring12Hrs 12:41, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support It's not the photographer's fault that the text is eroded. -- Ikan Kekek 23:43, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:46, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tallinn_city_and_ferry_terminal_at_night.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Tallin City and Ferry Terminal by night seen from Vanasadam --Virtual-Pano 04:58, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Oppose We don't see much, sorry. --Sebring12Hrs 11:34, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
    This is a hand held night shot with ferry terminal plus various other buildings in the vicinity are rather clear and well recognizable in imho --Virtual-Pano 21:11, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough to be printed neatly in A4 size. Even if a lot of ink/toner is needed and an exposure stack could show more details. --Smial 12:28, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support per Smial.--Ermell 08:06, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support It's a dark night photo and true to life, and I can see enough at full size on my 22 1/2-inch monitor. -- Ikan Kekek 23:45, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:47, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Crkva_sv._Ivana_-_Jelsa-B&W.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Church of Saint John, Jelsa, Croatia by User:Stratokumulus --Ezarate 17:00, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Too much noisy. --Sebring12Hrs 09:24, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
    Noise reduction applied --Ezarate 23:07, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
     Comment Thanks for the edit, but I think too over-processed now, sorry. --Sebring12Hrs 06:33, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Lots of processing artifacts and possibly compression artifacts. Nothing against black and white photography, but the implementation here is not successful. --Smial 12:33, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Comment The image should be improved. There is no black and no white. May be details are missing. --XRay 16:13, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek 23:46, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:49, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bad_Berneck_Marktplatz-20221002-RM-171316.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination The market place of Bad Berneck --Ermell 07:19, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:28, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
     Oppose I want to support ! But it's leaning a bit, and there are artifacts on the contours of the clock tower. --Sebring12Hrs 06:34, 12 October 2022 (UTC)
    ✓ Done Thanks for the review.--Ermell 19:29, 13 October 2022 (UTC)
     Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 07:10, 14 October 2022 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:51, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:20220810_St._Nikolaikirche_Potsdam_17.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: View from the St. Nikolaikirche to the city palace of Potsdam --FlocciNivis 17:23, 30 September 2022 (UTC)
  • Review
    the dark area is unsharp and a big --Ezarate 21:30, 2 October 2022 (UTC)
     Support I don't see issues with sharpness. Nice composition.--Roughlyspeaking 20:28, 4 October 2022 (UTC)
     Oppose Perpective issues. And some parts are blurred. --Sebring12Hrs 07:15, 10 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Comment Given the angle, whether the perspective is OK is debatable, but there are dust spots that need fixing. Look carefully across the sky; some are lighter than others. -- Ikan Kekek 06:42, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
  •  Comment My PC I do the editing on is atm in repair. Can we maybe just let this image go unassessed? Then I'll do the editing, when I have it backand would resubmit it. But no hard feelings, if that's not possible or you judge it not to be a QI --FlocciNivis 19:12, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
  • I don't have a problem with that. Good luck with the repairs! -- Ikan Kekek 22:35, 11 October 2022 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:58, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Slovensko_narodno_gledališče_Opera_in_balet_Ljubljana_(Ljubljana_Opera_and_Ballet,_Slovenia).jpg[edit]

  • Nomination: Slovene National Theatre Opera and Ballet in Ljubljana --PetarM 15:19, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
  • Review
     OpposeVerticals should be corrected --Ermell 19:59, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
     Support At right, it's seems to leaning a bit, but it's IMO not a problem, it'sa little little bit. --Sebring12Hrs 08:36, 8 October 2022 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:53, 17 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]