Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 03 2022

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Radenthein_Friedenstrasse_Kriegerdenkmal_Buch_1914-1918_mit_Namen_der_Gefallenen_17092015_7477.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Copper relief book with the names of the fallen during the First World War (1914-1918), war memorial on Friedenstraße, Radenthein, Carinthia, Austria -- Johann Jaritz 02:15, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:22, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The numbers are sharp but the top and right edges are blurred. --Tagooty 04:21, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO sharp enough. --XRay 04:31, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Temp  Oppose Regarding the resolution the sharpness is by far good enough. I'm also fine with colours and lighting. But the image needs a slight CCW rotation. You could orientate yourself roughly on the upper edge of the stone plate. Even if the object as shown is much heavier on the right side than on the left, the image should not tilt to the right. ;-) --Smial 10:57, 29 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Fine to me. -- Ikan Kekek 06:04, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   —Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:22, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

File:Wolken_(long_exposure_photography)_07-08-2022._(d.j.b)_03.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Clouds (long exposure photography) location: camping De old tram bridge, Pieterpad. (long exposure photography) location: camping De old tram bridge, Pieterpad.
    --Famberhorst 05:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 11:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Nice shot, but, the image needs at least a -0,60 rotation. -- Terragio67 21:25, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done. Vertical correction. Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst 05:24, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
      •  Support Thanks, I crossed out my previous decision. Good quality! -- Terragio67 11:30, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support I do not see any significant problem now -- LexKurochkin 07:09, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support OK to me. -- Ikan Kekek 06:06, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:23, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

File:Vancouver_(BC,_Canada),_Vancouver_Harbour_Flight_Centre_und_Kreuzfahrtschiff_"Queen_Elizabeth"_--_2022_--_2144.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Seaplane at Vancouver Harbour Flight Centre and departing cruise ship “Queen Elizabeth”, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada --XRay 04:19, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 04:24, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The same foto was 26 aug. (The difference is only in the aspect ratio of the picture). Please select one. --Mike1979 Russia 07:31, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Per XRay in the "File:Vancouver_(BC,_Canada),_Vancouver_Harbour_Flight_Centre_und_Kreuzfahrtschiff_"Queen_Elizabeth"_--_2022_--_171906.jpg" discussion. --Mike1979 Russia (talk) 11:08, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support The ship is the same, but the image is different. Good quality. --Palauenc05 07:57, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
    •  Comment Not ship only. But airplane, pierce, objects in background are same. As well as the composition and lighting of the image. --Mike1979 Russia 08:09, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
    •  Comment @Mike1979 Russia: It's not the same photograph and uniqueness isn't a criteria of QI. Please do not confuse with VI. --XRay 09:39, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
    •  Comment BTW, Mike1979 Russia: This photograph is taken with a Canon EOS 5D M4, the on the 26th with a Smartphone. --XRay 09:42, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
      •  Comment But there is value criteria. And I don't see value in two fotos with same main and sermain objects (with same angle), objects in foreground and background, composition and lightning but taken by different devices in same moment. --Mike1979 Russia 10:48, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
        •  Comment :* Value, not uniqueness. --XRay 11:04, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Palauenc05 -- LexKurochkin 07:20, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality, and not merely a closeup of the other image. -- Ikan Kekek 06:35, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 10:24, 2 September 2022 (UTC)

File:VW_T-Roc_auf_dem_Bodensee.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Lake Constance: A lonely VW T-Roc on the ferry to Romanshorn at a late February day --JoachimKohler-HB 04:29, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality -- Johann Jaritz 08:50, 24 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Oppose top left corner --Charlesjsharp 20:00, 25 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support IMO the composition is OK. --XRay 19:13, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support I'd have probably cropped a chunk of the top, but still QI to me Poco a poco 16:52, 28 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Comment Flat-out nice picture to me. Could you add some additional relevant categories? -- Ikan Kekek 06:39, 30 August 2022 (UTC)
  •  Support Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek 03:51, 2 September 2022 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted Ikan Kekek 03:51, 2 September 2022 (UTC)