List Of Best Dating Site In United State 2016 2017
- List Of Best Dating Site In United State 2016 2017 Youtube
- List Of Best Dating Site In United State 2016 2017 Roster
Ippe2 secc list 2017 Article on how to use the best website. Online dating site or app usage 2017, by website U.S. Internet user awareness of online dating sites and apps 2017 Most visible online dating-related sites in natural search results in the UK.
Description of lot | Contracting entity | Contract date | Contract amount, UAH |
Prohramne zabezpechennia dlia avtomatyzovanoyi systemy vyrobnytstva novyn «octopus newsroom computer system (nrcs); prohramne zabezpechennia dlia avtomatyzovanoyi systemy vyrobnytstva novyn «octopus newsroom computer system (nrcs) 2 od | KP Kyyivskoyi miskoyi rady «Telekompaniia «Kyyiv» | 20.12.2021 | 60 080 |
Prohramne zabezpechennia dlia avtomatyzovanoyi systemy vyrobnytstva novyn «octopus newsroom computer system (nrcs); prohramne zabezpechennia dlia avtomatyzovanoyi systemy vyrobnytstva novyn «octopus newsroom computer system (nrcs) 1 od | KP Kyyivskoyi miskoyi rady «Telekompaniia «Kyyiv» | 20.12.2021 | 30 040 |
Zakupivlia posluhy z postachannia ta konfihuruvannia prohramnoho zabezpechennia systemy keruvannia vyrobnytstva novyn grassvalley stratus u vyhliadi litsenziyi na pravo yikh vykorystannia (kod dk 021:2015: 72260000-5 posluhy, pov’iazani z prohramnym zabezpechenniam); zakupivlia posluhy z postachannia ta konfihuruvannia prohramnoho zabezpechennia systemy keruvannia vyrobnytstva novyn grassvalley stratus u vyhliadi litsenziyi na pravo yikh vykorystannia (kod dk 021:2015: 72260000-5 posluhy, pov’iazani z prohramnym zabezpechenniam) 1 posluha | Derzhavne pidpryiemstvo 'Multymediyna platforma inomovlennia Ukrayiny' | 10.12.2021 | 1 796 567 |
Alemannisch asturianu čeština dansk Deutsch English فارسی español suomi français galego हिन्दी magyar italiano 日本語 한국어 Lëtzebuergesch молдовеняскэ norsk bokmål português polski română русский shqip српски / srpski svenska ไทย українська 粵語 中文(简体) 中文(繁體) հայերեն Bahasa Indonesia +/−
Skip to current candidates |
Featured picture candidates Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here.There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
| ||||||||||||||||||
Nominating[edit]Guidelines for nominators[edit]Please read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents[edit]There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject. Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable. Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself. Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well. Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:
Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as 'Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced.' Photographs[edit]On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audio[edit]Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominations[edit]If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:
Simple tutorial for new users[edit]How to nominate in 8 simple steps Adding a new nomination[edit]If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following. Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the 'create new nomination' button. All single files:
Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list:Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:
Strongly recommended: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify him/her using Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for different crops or post-processing of the original image, if they are suggested by voters. Voting[edit]Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator. A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above. Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly 'good enough', this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:
This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:
If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box: In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:
After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose. Featured picture candidate policy[edit]General rules[edit]
Featuring and delisting rules[edit]A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations. The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules. Above all, be polite[edit]Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like 'it looks terrible' and 'I hate it'. If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care. Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken. See also[edit]
|
Table of contents[edit]
List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity). Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences 'Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC' to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected. |
Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache |
Featured picture candidates[edit]
File:2020-01-21 HB-ZQJ in action for Freestyle skiing – Snowboarding at the 2020 Winter Youth Olympics – Team Ski-Snowboard Cross (Martin Rulsch).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2021 at 12:15:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport
- Info created by DerHexer - uploaded by DerHexer - nominated by DerHexer —DerHexer(Talk) 12:15, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- —DerHexer(Talk) 12:15, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Bloem van een kerstroos (Helleborus niger) 16-12-2021. (d.j.b) 02.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2021 at 05:50:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Ranunculaceae
- Info Flower of a Helleborus niger Christmas rose Focus stack of 50 photos.
All by--Famberhorst (talk) 05:50, 22 December 2021 (UTC) - Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:41, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:28, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:36, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I think a cleaner background would help when the shot is all set up for focus-stacking, e.g. no leaf in front foreground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:28, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Commonists 11:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Vieillot's black weaver (Ploceus nigerrimus castaneofuscus) male on nest.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2021 at 21:52:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Ploceidae (Weavers)
- Info The male weavers assemble together in colonies to build their nests. It's a noisy competition and they will build and rebuild nests to attract a female. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:52, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:52, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Although IMHO you should go a bit down with sharpness here --Poco a poco (talk) 23:42, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question You're calling for less sharpness? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:58, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 08:00, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:36, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:48, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak support Not perfect but good--Commonists 11:33, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Panorama of the Cesta Tower in San Marino.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2021 at 20:20:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#San_Marino
- Info created ,uploaded and nominated by Commonists -- Commonists 20:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Abstain -- Commonists 20:20, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose No wow and looks oversharpened. --A.Savin 23:04, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Same. A shame for such a camera. - Benh (talk) 11:59, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Citrus swallowtails (Papilio demodocus) Principe.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2021 at 15:24:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Papilionidae (Swallowtails)
- Info A demonstration of flying skill. Two swallowtails are hovering inside the same flower to feed. Image from A Sharp Eye on wildlife photography: São Tomé and Príncipe. Turn to page 30 for a scarcely believable fact about parrotfish you can use to entertain the kids over the holidays. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:24, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:24, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support This one is special. I would have nominated it soon if you hadn't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:59, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:13, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:44, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:14, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Great shot. Thanks for sharing the link to your journal – this issue is particularly stunning! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Really stunning. --Aristeas(talk) 07:58, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan and F. Schulenburg. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 11:58, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Sacred Kingfisher- Sydney Olympic Park.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2021 at 16:15:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Alcedinidae_(Kingfishers)
- Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 16:15, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support – Ivar (talk) 16:15, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Though I'd prefer a square crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:40, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Stepro (talk) 16:41, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Charles. --Basotxerri (talk) 17:38, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Good picture, but why is the background so black? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:00, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:27, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:14, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 19:25, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question Has the original background in this picture been replaced? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:29, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think so. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:30, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- +1. Authentic background in my opinion. Increase the light on a software and you'll see a sort of gradient of dark colors -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 22:50, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:28, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 07:57, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:13, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 12:49, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:25, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Ringelblume mit Raureif-20211123-RM-110947.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 22:39:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily_:_Asteroideae
- Info Marigold with hoarfrost. Focus stack from 23 frames. Created by Ermell - uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 22:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 22:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Great work! -- Radomianin (talk) 23:05, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- -donald- (talk) 06:47, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Commonists 07:37, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Very pretty, but I miss the whole flower. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:47, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Appetizing like a refined dessert with sugar topping :-) Basile Morin (talk) 11:33, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:06, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:52, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:10, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:15, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 19:25, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:28, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful. (Made a small fix to the gallery link.) --Aristeas(talk) 07:54, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Excellent! -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:12, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportChristian Ferrer(talk) 12:18, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 12:51, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:22, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Banco de peces trompeta (Macroramphosus scolopax), islas Azores, Portugal, 2020-07-27, DD 38.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 21:38:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Order_:_Syngnathiformes_(Pipefishes_and_Seahorses)
- Info School of trumpetfishes (Macroramphosus scolopax), between the islands of Pico and Faial, Azores, Portugal. This fish is found worldwide in tropical to subtropical water in the Atlantic, Indian, and west Pacific Oceans, at depths of 25 to 600 m (82 to 1,969 ft). c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 22:21, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 00:13, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Isiwal (talk) 07:26, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Nice texture for the pattern of a bathroom wallpaper :-) Basile Morin (talk) 11:27, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 16:17, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Basotxerri (talk) 17:40, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:12, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Basile ;–). Yes, this also works if seen as an abstract artwork. --Aristeas(talk) 07:54, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:35, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 12:51, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:2019-11-24 Men's World Cup at 2019-20 Luge World Cup in Igls by Sandro Halank–031.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 20:02:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual snow sports
- Info Men's World Cup race at the 2019/20 Luge World Cup in Innsbruck-Igls: Kristers Aparjods (Latvia) after a crash in the finish curve; created, uploaded and nominated by Sandro Halank -- Sandro Halank (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Sandro Halank (talk) 20:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 20:04, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 22:22, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Unusual angle, good composition and very sharp. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Sport 🎿 :-) Basile Morin (talk) 11:26, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:13, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. --Aristeas(talk) 18:59, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:16, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:11, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:19, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:FCAB GL26C-2 2005, GT22CU 2501 and GT22CU-3 2401 Cebollar - Carcote.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 18:16:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
- Info created & uploaded by Kabelleger - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 18:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 18:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Basotxerri (talk) 18:56, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Perfect composition. --Yann (talk) 19:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 19:53, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --A.Savin 19:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 19:56, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support because of the composition and pleasant interplay of color shades. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:27, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Poco a poco (talk) 21:42, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportCharlesjsharp (talk) 22:12, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 22:22, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:59, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:49, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support —Bruce1eetalk 07:11, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Striking angle -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:24, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:53, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:12, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 16:17, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas(talk) 18:59, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:11, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Fuchsia October 2014-1a.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 16:48:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Onagraceae
- Info Again, a rather conservative nomination: a pair of Hummingbird fuchsia's flowers (Fuchsia magellanica). I confess I was influenced by this nomination, being now evaluated. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:48, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:48, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 19:54, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question Focus stack? Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Info - Nope, the shot was made from a generous distance, to increase DOF, and then cropped. Occam's razor: Pluralitas non est ponenda sine necessitate :)) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks SupportCharlesjsharp (talk) 09:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 18:58, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:10, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:18, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 12:52, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:2018-12-13 Pressekonferenz zur Vorbereitung des Biathlon-Weltcups und der Umbenennung der Ski-Arena StP 7327 LR10 by Stepro.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 11:20:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Machines
- Info snowgun in use at Biathlon Arena Oberhof, created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
- Support -- Stepro (talk) 11:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question Why does this photo have a personality rights warning? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:48, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks for pointing this. It was a mistake while uploading the whole set, I removed the template at the pics without people. Stepro (talk) 11:57, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question Are you shure the image shows what is said in the file name? --Llez (talk) 12:05, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Yes. As you can see in the Category the press conference started outdoor with some impressions of the arena, continued indoor with the literal press conference, and ended again outdoor with the group picture on the bridge with the mascot (last pic in cat). Stepro (talk) 13:06, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Sorry, I only see a snow cannon, neither a conference outdoor nor indoor nor a mascot --Llez (talk) 13:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- As I explained the impressions of the arena were part of the press conference. Maybe you want to click on the link to the cat I gave above. Stepro (talk) 13:51, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- This is one photo of a series and in this series, this name is correct. Marcus Cyron (talk) 16:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Wrong crop, IMO. File:2018-12-13 Pressekonferenz zur Vorbereitung des Biathlon-Weltcups und der Umbenennung der Ski-Arena StP 7325 LR10 by Stepro.jpg is already better, but crop is too short at right and bottom. Yann (talk) 17:22, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thank you for your vote. My intention here is to show the producing of the artifical snow, not some of this machines nor the snow on the ground. That's why in my opinion this crop fits perfect to my intention. Stepro (talk) 17:45, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per explanation, and I think the composition works. A slightly longer explanation in your English-language file description could be helpful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:01, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks, I've expanded the description. --Stepro (talk) 12:25, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Perhaps a VI but no wow for me. Awkward composition, with tight crop at the bottom, and at the right. Average light, boring sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:16, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Millers Falls Massachusetts October 2021 002.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 06:06:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#United States
- Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:06, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:06, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Aerial views offer often an unexpected and interesting view of common (or not so common) areas. I believe that we will see here many of those, but in this case it isn't really working, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 11:09, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Tbriz guy machid.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 04:58:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Iran
- Info created and uploaded by Hameddaeipic - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 04:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:58, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Very nice, but there's magenta CA at the limits of the direct sunlight on the left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:49, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice but highlights blown, not fixable. I can't see how this made QI. --Basotxerri (talk) 18:59, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I wasn't the one who evaluated it at QIC, and had I been, I would have asked for the CA to be fixed, but I think some viewers are OK with sunlight being blown in a larger context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 22:24, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
Since there's now a 2nd vote for a photo with uncorrected CA, I must Oppose.-- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:02, 21 December 2021 (UTC)- Comment@Ikan Kekek and Basotxerri: I tried to correct the CA several times but the end result was not good, I don't know if it is due to image incorrigibility or just my poor skill. Because there is other support besides myself I am not withdrawing at the moment to hear more comments about it. --IamMM (talk) 02:34, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks for trying. Side point: This photo should be renamed after the nomination is over because Tabriz is misspelled. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:51, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I will try my luck with these CAs, too … --Aristeas(talk) 08:11, 22 December 2021 (UTC) But it’s a difficult case, because the CA colours (red, bluish green) are very similar to the colours of the brick stone and of the ornaments. So I ask for your patience … --Aristeas(talk) 10:03, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment@IamMM and Ikan Kekek: I have reduced the CAs in the lower part, especially at the high contrast borders in the lower left. (And I have set the colour profile, it was undefined; I guess this is just sRGB.) There are still some CAs near the top border, they are even harder to fix because of the low colour contrast. I will try that later, but for now I hope that this version is at least a bit better. Best, --Aristeas(talk) 10:37, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Huge improvement. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Downy woodpecker in PP (90879).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 02:00:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Picidae_(Woodpeckers)
- Info Downy woodpeckers (Picoides pubescens) are the smallest woodpeckers in the world, and this one with a leaf caught on its bill after drilling into a log was pretty adorable. The background could be a little more blurred, but the color contrast works for separation IMO. all by — Rhododendritestalk 02:00, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendritestalk 02:00, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Pretty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:15, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 11:21, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 13:46, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 15:19, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:26, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 15:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportCharlesjsharp (talk) 22:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 22:24, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Very nice and good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:22, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 15:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:13, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 18:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Pond sliders in Prospect Park (03861).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2021 at 01:52:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Emydidae_(Pond_Turtles)
- Info Pond sliders (Trachemys scripta) on a log. Adult and two juveniles. Turtles on a log in a pond/lake is a common sight, but I think the little ones are cute and like the way they're framed by the reflection and the lilies. all by — Rhododendritestalk 01:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support — Rhododendritestalk 01:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:16, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:27, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Stepro (talk) 16:25, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Are those three turtles sitting on that log all the time? -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:31, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:38, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 22:24, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Close to oppose Unappealing harsh light -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:21, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 18:57, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 03:09, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Pörtschach Halbinselpromenade Kopperbucht Seeblick 07012021 0324.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2021 at 21:21:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Carinthia
- Info IMO a really nice and well composed wintery landscape. created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Very peaceful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:07, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Commonists 22:49, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 15:17, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:23, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Stepro (talk) 16:40, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:39, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Isiwal (talk) 07:27, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:35, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 18:56, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Spital aP Ochsenwaldkapelle vv.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2021 at 21:21:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Upper_Austria
- Info I found the colours and composition of this mountain landscape painterly and compelling. created by Isiwal - uploaded by Isiwal - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 21:21, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- WeakSupport Very beautiful scene, though detail is not the highest at 24 MP with mediocre pixel-level sharpness. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- True. 24 megapixels is a decent size though. This 10.7mpx downsample seems pretty sharp at pixel level. Cmao20 (talk) 21:37, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I cannot see what is the purpose of the huge tree. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question Isn't a tree's purpose simply to live? :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:46, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Solitary trees, if they grow at all, grow strong (WSC) Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:55, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support An impressive landscape photo for me. --Stepro (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak support per King of Hearts. --Aristeas(talk) 18:55, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose I agree with Charles, the composition is not working for me, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 10:01, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Freesia February 2013-1.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2021 at 12:58:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Iridaceae
- Info Small and delicate flowers whose beauty is only perceived at close range. Previously nominated image was improved. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:58, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Vertical lines in background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Done Thanks, I found one vertical artefact on the left. Fixed now. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 16:26, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Bottom right, still. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:32, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Done Thank you. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 22:38, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- One more on the bottom leaf, right below the flower, I'm afraid --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:01, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Fixed -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 09:46, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:19, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Stepro (talk) 16:46, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:33, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 11:03, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportDaniel Case (talk) 03:42, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Li Phi falls at sunset with orange sky and a fishing boat in Don Khon Si Phan Don Laos.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2021 at 02:33:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Laos
- Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support ---GRDN711 (talk) 07:20, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Looks dangerous without life jackets in the wooden box.--Ermell (talk) 09:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Yes some activities around these waterfalls are very risky with accidents every year, but it is also a beautiful environment -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Wow --Commonists 09:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 12:07, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 16:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --XRay💬 18:36, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Despite the excellent composition and mood, I'm not confortable with the technical quality. The lack of detail and overall fuzziness suggest the image may have been subjected to agressive denoising. But I may be wrong, of course. -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:36, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- It was shot at 100 iso, the best I could manage, but of course slightly underexposed to avoid blown highlights or burnt sky. Some noise appeared in post-process when adjusting the light to a normal level, and then removed with Topaz DenoiseAI, a professional software used with the standard parameters (here only 15%, thus quite moderate). Using the bracketing technique with longer exposure times to produce a HDR image was too complex due to the boat in movement intended to be frozen without motion blur. See the picture at lower resolution. Thanks for the feedback -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportCmao20 (talk) 21:24, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:27, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 07:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 11:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:50, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:48, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Beautiful composition, however the post processing was not good, aggressive noise reduction (Mainly visible on bushes or rocks lacking any texture) and unnecessary HDR (The dynamic range of the camera was already sufficient, adding different exposures damages and sacrifices sharpness. In the best of cases it is preferable to carry out a selective unification by layers), focus problems on the person in the boat, finally please add the HDR appropriate category --Wilfredor (talk) 19:44, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Info As said above, it is not a HDR image. I wrote 'Using the bracketing technique with longer exposure times to produce a HDR image was too complex', that's why I did not use this technique (that would have helped otherwise). But note that longer exposure times would have changed the aspect of the water too -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Isiwal (talk) 07:29, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportDaniel Case (talk) 03:39, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support wow Christian Ferrer(talk) 12:17, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Fränkische Schweiz Getreideernte-20210821-RM-154344.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2021 at 23:26:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Other_land_vehicles
- Info Combine harvester during grain harvest in Franconian Switzerland. All by Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 23:26, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ermell (talk) 23:26, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Could be a good VIC candidate, but not inspiring. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Good image but agree wth Ikan. --GRDN711 (talk) 07:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per others. Good but not that special. --Kreuzschnabel 09:20, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak support In my eyes this is impressive, especially with the enormous cloud of dust which indicates how dry the grain is. Last autumn I have searched for some impressive photo of modern harvesting and would have been happy if I had found this one. ;–) However I agree that something is missing; maybe it is the light which could be even better. --Aristeas(talk) 16:28, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Per Aristeas --Commonists 18:25, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak support per Aristeas, the light could maybe be better but the photo does its job and the image quality is good Cmao20 (talk) 21:24, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per other opposes. Daniel Case (talk) 01:36, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Viburnum opulus fruits close-up - Keila.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2021 at 13:39:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Adoxaceae
- Info all by Ivar (talk) 13:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ivar (talk) 13:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:13, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:04, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 18:08, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportChristian Ferrer(talk) 21:39, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Super. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:14, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:42, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --XRay💬 07:04, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 07:29, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:19, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Very colourful Cmao20 (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:41, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Strong support One that made me stop my scrolling ... Daniel Case (talk) 01:35, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Bled Island 07.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2021 at 13:23:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Slovenia
- Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 13:23, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 13:23, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support The composition and especially the light on the lake island are very appealing. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 17:13, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:21, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support At first, I was thinking I'd like this better with the hill and boring modern buildings on the left cropped out, but the form works, with its counterpoint between the island, hill and historic buildings on the right and the further-away hill and modern buildings on the left, and the distant snow-capped peak that's lit up provides additional interest. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Per Ikan.--Ermell (talk) 22:35, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Very nice. Although I would crop the left hazy part personally (contrary to Ikan), so as to highlight the great light of the colorful island -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:41, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --XRay💬 07:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 07:27, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 08:02, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 12:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Some years ago I needed a good photo of that famous island and surprisingly it was not easy to find a really good one. I would have be happy if I had this one ;–). --Aristeas(talk) 16:16, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Neutral -- Inspiring composition and good quality. A shame that the whites don't show any detail (overexposure?) -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:40, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportCmao20 (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:29, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Neutral Per Alvesgaspar and the buildings on the left are leaning a bit out (or ar tilted, not sure). Would support if both issues are fixed Poco a poco (talk) 11:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Milseburg (talk) 14:49, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:42, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportDaniel Case (talk) 21:56, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Treppenhaus Handwerkskammer Hamburg oben.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2021 at 06:55:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
- Info created & uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 06:55, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 06:55, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:12, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:42, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 10:42, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:58, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:06, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 17:14, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas(talk) 18:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:22, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:37, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --XRay💬 07:05, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --GRDN711 (talk) 07:15, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 07:26, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 12:09, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:53, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Very nice! This is one of those cases where the blown whites are part of the magic... -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 20:44, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportCmao20 (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:29, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 11:18, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:50, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:18, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Although I do think the blown whites in the rear could have been toned down a bit. But they're not something you really notice until you look at the image full size. Daniel Case (talk) 21:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Vepricardium orbiculare 01.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2021 at 06:41:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Cardiidae
- Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 06:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:09, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:48, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:43, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question Two different shells? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:23, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment No, views of the same shell from 6 directions: left, back, front, right (upper row), dorsal, ventral (bottom row) --Llez (talk) 10:33, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Thanks. SupportCharlesjsharp (talk) 00:03, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 10:06, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:34, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 10:42, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:18, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 13:42, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 14:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support This shell is really a subtle work of art. --Aristeas(talk) 18:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Incidentally the arrangement of the images reveals two faces to me, each composed of a pair of eyes and a mouth with two lips :-) Basile Morin (talk) 02:36, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --XRay💬 18:35, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportCmao20 (talk) 21:23, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --GRDN711 (talk) 03:11, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:32, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:20, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 11:17, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:43, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support I thought they were chocolates at first. Daniel Case (talk) 18:40, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Lenguado común (Solea solea), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2020-07-23, DD 05-06 FS.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2021 at 21:08:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Order_:_Pleuronectiformes_(Flatfish)
- InfoCommon sole (Solea solea), Arrábida Natural Park, Portugal. The common sole is a species of flatfish in the family Soleidae. It lives on the sandy or muddy seabed of the northern Atlantic and the Mediterranean Sea where it often semi-immerses itself in the substrate as seen on the image. The small eyes are close to each other on the right side of the body. This gives the fish the possibility of lurking half-buried in the sand for passing prey. The common sole, just like all other flatfishes, hatches as an 'ordinary' fish with one eye on each side of the body. The young metamorphose to flatfish when they are about one centimeter long. The upper side is greyish-brown and the underside is white. It grows to a maximum length of about 70 cm (28 in) although this exemplar was about 30 cm (12 in) long. The species is prized as a food fish, being caught mostly by trawling on the seabed. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:08, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:08, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support I don't know how this will be received at FPC since I have seen people express negative views towards camouflage photos before, but for me it's definitely pretty cool to see how the camouflage works. The focus on the fish is really good. Could you copy the above description to the file page? Cmao20 (talk) 02:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- I copied the description. And yes, I agree with you. I know the little average enthusiasm here on FPC about camouflage motifs but for the common sole there is nothing more representative like this. It's the way wildlife is and the way nature works, and asking here for a better delimitation from the sourroundings wouldn't make much sense. Poco a poco (talk) 06:32, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:01, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Question Nice photo. I think this would be better rotated 45 deg and 3 x 2 crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:25, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Seconded, I think that's worth a try. --El Grafo (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Charlesjsharp, El Grafo: New version uploaded, FYI too @Cmao20, Yann, Palauenc05, and Aristeas: Poco a poco (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Thanks. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Charlesjsharp, El Grafo: New version uploaded, FYI too @Cmao20, Yann, Palauenc05, and Aristeas: Poco a poco (talk) 20:36, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Seconded, I think that's worth a try. --El Grafo (talk) 15:26, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Also OK for me. Yann (talk) 20:54, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Fine by me Cmao20 (talk) 20:59, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Fine. It’s interesting that the camouflage works a tiny little bit less efficiently now: my eyes/brain now recognize the fish easier than in the original orientation of the photo ;–). --Aristeas(talk) 16:31, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Excellent camouflage illustration. --Aristeas(talk) 18:07, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --XRay💬 07:06, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 07:25, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:07, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:34, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 11:45, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Ivar (talk) 12:10, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Interesting --IamMM (talk) 04:32, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:27, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportDaniel Case (talk) 18:37, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Restaurant in Place D'Youville, Quebec City.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2021 at 14:27:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
- Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 14:27, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Moderate support I wish the elements closest to the camera were not so out of focus, but otherwise very good and compelling composition with nice colour combinations. Cmao20 (talk) 15:42, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- It is not an out of focus, but they are out of the dynamic range. In photos where it is not possible to use a tripod, speed must be sacrificed for depth of field. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:59, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Was there any need to crop three lamp shades (the nearest one is askew)? Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:38, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Nice scene with blue and yellow contrasting. There's some colour moire in the light fitting above the bar (the O glass shades). I think a square crop might eliminate the troubling left and focus on the more interesting bits. If you don't want to crop that far, a 4:3 crop removing the left will stop the left lamp shade appearing to slope. -- Colin (talk) 18:17, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- I like the 4:3 crop, I think it is a good alternative, it reminds me a lot of the type of cut generated by medium format cameras. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Interesting indoor scene with appealing colors. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:12, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Very nice scene. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:46, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Frank. --Aristeas(talk) 16:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 22:17, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:30, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Argenberg (talk) 16:37, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Qualified support per Cmao. But overall I like the combination of colors, shapes and textures. Not the sort of thing we usually see here. Daniel Case (talk) 05:48, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:06, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Stone panel describing events in the 7th century CE.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2021 at 14:28:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures
- Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 14:28, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment It would be nice to have some annotations so that I know what I'm actually looking at. Pretty hard to interpret what's going on here. Cmao20 (talk) 15:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 04:34, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Wilfredo, and per this just not being an exciting image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:44, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Per me? :) --Wilfredor (talk) 14:04, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Havana - Cuba - 2700.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2021 at 10:42:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Sitting_people
- Info created by Jorgeroyan - uploaded by Jorgeroyan - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 10:42, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Andrei (talk) 10:42, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Striking portrait. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:33, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Deep expression, the eyes almost speak of the enslaving day of living in the dictatorship --Wilfredor (talk) 14:16, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Wilfredor. Cmao20 (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 17:19, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose It must have been intended, but I don't go for the cropped head. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:41, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Charles, I don't understand why this cropped head is special --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. --GRDN711 (talk) 07:00, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Charles --Ivar (talk) 13:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per Charles. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:38, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Very expressive portrait. I also like the postprocessing. While cropping the head might be less common in other fields of photography, in portraiture, it's totally accepted (and yes, intended). I suggest studying the visual language of other fields of photography than the ones that are most common here (church interiors, trains-in-a-landscape, wildlife, architecture, macro). Photography is so much more… --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:31, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Indeed! -- Julesvernex2 (talk) 18:38, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Have to confess that I prefer complete heads, too ;–), but Frank has convinced me – this is considered a legitimate composition in portraiture. --Aristeas(talk) 16:14, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose The issue isn't that there's a cropped head, but rather this crop, which is [to me] like the 'what not to do' section in Jules' link above. I think if this shot were framed to be tighter around his head, or if he weren't looking upwards, it might be ok. In other words, the combination of the other three crops and the pose makes the top crop look strange to me. — Rhododendritestalk 03:36, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:53, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Rhododendrites. The arm crop makes you wonder about why the head was cropped. It looks like the photographer had some idea that felt more important than the photo. Daniel Case (talk) 02:38, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:05, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Black bear - Cypress Provincial Park.jpg, not featured[edit]
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2021 at 08:54:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Ursidae_(Bears)
- Info: black bear portrait; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:54, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:54, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice picture, but not sharp enough for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:32, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per Ikan, lovely photo and composition but doesn't seem quite sharp anywhere. Cmao20 (talk) 15:39, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Beyond the sharpness issue, I really don't find it exceptional enough as a picture of a bear for FP. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Church in Santa Leocadia de Briteiros (1).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2021 at 15:56:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Portugal
- Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 15:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportEzarateesteban 19:14, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak support Interesting motif and I like the worn-out trailer. But the light is a little bit harsh. Cmao20 (talk) 15:38, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose the parked trailer and the wall on the left disturb the whole picture. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:04, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Weak oppose The trailer doesn't bother me as it's not obvious. The wall does. And especially the light. Daniel Case (talk) 06:28, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Looking again at this photo I actually like the soft light and the old trailer. (It’s funny: each voter dislikes something else – yours truly dislikes that stupid modern building in the background at the left with that ugly roller shutter ;–). --Aristeas(talk) 08:06, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Ramsau Kirche mit Wagendrischelhorn 2.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2021 at 14:07:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
- Info Church of Ramsau in front of the Reiter Alm mountain range, Bavaria, Germany -- Milseburg (talk) 14:07, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Milseburg (talk) 14:07, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Excellent! Just a question: obviously, the contrails were real, but would it be acceptable to remove them? MartinD (talk) 14:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support, magnifique. --Tournasol7 (talk) 16:01, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Sehr schön. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportCharlesjsharp (talk) 17:56, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
OpposeBeautiful photo, but please remove the contrails --Michielverbeek (talk) 18:51, 16 December 2021 (UTC) Change to Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:42, 17 December 2021 (UTC)- Support --Ermell (talk) 19:41, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support The light is a bit harsh and the visitor at the left rather distracting, still a nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support, and I'm OK with the contrail, which is not bad-looking and just reminds us that this is a contemporary photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:47, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 02:59, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Basile and Ikan. --Aristeas(talk) 07:31, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 09:56, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:01, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support the contrails could be removed, imo, but they're not that big a deal. Strange that we don't have a single FP of this almost standard Bavarian scene, yet. --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:48, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:45, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Strong shadow of the tree on the left and the person distracts the composition --Wilfredor (talk) 14:21, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful colours and composition. Cmao20 (talk) 15:37, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment@Martin, Tournasol7, Frank Schulenburg, Charlesjsharp, Michielverbeek, Ermell, Basile Morin, Ikan Kekek, IamMM, Aristeas, Poco a poco, Agnes Monkelbaan, Llez, Wilfredor, and Cmao20: Thank you for the feedback. I removed the constain and the person. Let me know if that wasn't an improvement. The old version can be restored. It is difficult to find this popular place without people. Futhermore I brightened a bit the tree at the bottom left. --Milseburg (talk) 15:49, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Removing the contrail was definetely an improvment. The person wasn't really disturbing to me as it somehow added some dynamic to the shot but also without it is a nice shot that deserves the star. Poco a poco (talk) 15:52, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment I liked the person, but I have no problem with either version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:15, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- I don't mind it either way. I think it's actually a very strong candidate, well done. Cmao20 (talk) 19:44, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Clean work and and something even better. --Ermell (talk) 19:53, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, I agree. Well done -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:56, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- I agree, too. Well done. --Aristeas(talk) 07:41, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:07, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Commonists 22:54, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:00, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:57, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:09, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --XRay💬 18:33, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 18:54, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportDaniel Case (talk) 06:26, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose because it's manipulated ('remove contrail and person') and doesn't show the reality, which in my opinion should not happen in an encyclopedia project. I am shocked that this is exactly what has been asked of by some here. --Stepro (talk) 22:32, 21 December 2021 (UTC)
- InfoWhat Commons is not: 'Wikimedia Commons is not an encyclopedia'. The guidelines at the top of COM:FPC also state: Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
- Concerning the allegation of 'manipulation', I wonder what is manipulation in photography. Is a long exposure manipulation of the reality, for example? Or focus stacking, light painting, etc?
- I also wonder what is the most faithful representation of this place: with or without the visitor? A walker is not a permanent statue.
- A very large amount of architecture photos are modified in post-process, because the Image guidelines require such transformations, for example walls should be vertical (we call that Perspective correction). But any post-treatment (light adjustment, dust spot removals, HDR composition, and so on), is manipulation.
- Apart from that, note that even photomontages are perfectly acceptable at FPC (and at Wikipedia too) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:11, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Call it as you want. A fake is a fake. And it's not the failt of the photographer, but of those, who expect a postcard idyll instead of reality. Yes, Commons is not Wikipedia. But it's also not Fakistan. Marcus Cyron (talk) 10:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Yeah, call it as you want too.
- Had a glance at your uploads. Not postcard idyll indeed, but many of them could be improved (horizontality for example). Greetings -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:46, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think that mobile and fleeting elements are part of the reality of a place. If they are important to you or someone else while searching for an realistic image of this place, an other version is even offered here, where all those things are there (see file description). --Milseburg (talk) 11:53, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Here you wrote: 'I don't think that mobile and fleeting elements are part of the reality of a place.'
- Above you wrote: 'It is difficult to find this popular place without people.'
- So what is the reality? This popular place with people or without? In my opinion in reality there are people as contrails as well, because people walking around there and planes flying over there.
- I'm really sorry to have this discussion here, maybe there is a better place. I think your photo is great and for sure a FP, but I think the demandings to manipulate it to become FP are absolutaly wrong. Stepro (talk) 12:13, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- I would support having a greater degree of realism here, but I'm not letting it affect my vote. I think it's fine that you are voting against a feature on that basis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:36, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think that mobile and fleeting elements are part of the reality of a place. If they are important to you or someone else while searching for an realistic image of this place, an other version is even offered here, where all those things are there (see file description). --Milseburg (talk) 11:53, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment@Stepro and Marcus Cyron: Neither the contrail nor the person are permanently seen at this spot, that means removing them is no fake. It's common practice here, and I don't see any ethical issues. Regards --A.Savin 14:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
- Call it as you want. A fake is a fake. And it's not the failt of the photographer, but of those, who expect a postcard idyll instead of reality. Yes, Commons is not Wikipedia. But it's also not Fakistan. Marcus Cyron (talk) 10:29, 22 December 2021 (UTC)
File:2018-11-02 Konzert -The Hellfreaks- in -Ilvers Musikbar- in Erfurt IMG 3414 LR10 by Stepro.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2021 at 01:15:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
- Info close-up of singer 'Shakey Sue' at a concert by the band 'The Hellfreaks' in Erfurt; created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
- Support -- Stepro (talk) 01:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Some noise may be inevitable in these kinds of shots, but you could selectively denoise the left background for a significant improvement in that area. An additional issue is that the crop is too close. Buidhe (talk) 01:36, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- I see no need to have a 'clean' background when zooming in to 100% in such an image. And the tight crop is intended. Stepro (talk) 01:44, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Expressive concert photo in difficult lighting situation perfectly solved in my opinion. --Ermell (talk) 09:40, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support according to Ermell's statement. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:31, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per Ermell. --Aristeas(talk) 11:38, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support per others --El Grafo (talk) 15:30, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --IamMM (talk) 02:26, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:42, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support Per the others --Domob (talk) 14:23, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support How close a crop you want is a matter of taste, but I think this works because it gives the viewer more of a sense that we are there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:02, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- SupportPoco a poco (talk) 09:58, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 12:01, 17 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 15:05, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support The blurry arm at lower left could have been distracting, but her face more than makes up for it. Daniel Case (talk) 04:06, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:11, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support.--Vulp❯❯❯here! 19:01, 19 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:52, 20 December 2021 (UTC)
File:Funambulus palmarum (Bengaluru).jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Dec 2021 at 13:23:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Sciuridae_(Squirrels)
- Info created and uploaded by Yathin sk - nominated by AryKun -- AryKun (talk) 13:23, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support really nice photo, high quality and helps show a common species that surprisingly doesn't have any FP's yet-- AryKun (talk) 13:23, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Good, but I don't think a photo with a cut-off tail is an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:01, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, this could have been great. However the cut off tail spoils it. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:29, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 09:21, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Support I don't care about the few hairs and think this pic is really great. --Stepro (talk) 15:28, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Lovely motif and nice and sharp but quite small for an FP in 2021 and given that, I struggle to forgive the cut-off tail Cmao20 (talk) 01:31, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
I think Stepro has a good point; after long consideration, my personal result is Weak support. --Aristeas(talk) 08:12, 15 December 2021 (UTC)Remove due to Ikan’s point below, sorry. --Aristeas(talk) 15:29, 15 December 2021 (UTC)- Comment This is a 'least concern' species that, aside from being endemic to India and Sri Lanka, according to Wikipedia, has even 'become a minor pest' in Madagascar, Réunion, Mayotte, Comoro Islands, Mauritius, Seychelles and Australia. I doubt that it's so hard to photograph that we should feature a photo of one with a slightly cropped tail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:06, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
- Comment Good point. A quick Flickr search for “Indian palm squirrel” finds 3.565 photos (there are probably more, as Flickr users often describe their photos insufficiently), many of them are very good. So it seems indeed rather easy to take photos of that species ... --Aristeas(talk) 15:29, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
- Yes, this species comes easily in contact with humans. There were many where I lived, and one of them came to eat in my hand. Yann (talk) 18:56, 15 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice photo but wrongly cropped on the left --Yeriho (talk) 13:25, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose per others. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
- Oppose Cropped tail doesn't bother me ... I didn't notice until it was pointed out. What does do this in as an FP for me is the blurry foreground—too distracting. Daniel Case (talk) 18:44, 18 December 2021 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]
Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]
The bot[edit]
Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.
Manual procedure[edit]
Any experienced user may close requests.
List Of Best Dating Site In United State 2016 2017 Youtube
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
{{FPC-results-reviewed support=x oppose=x neutral=x featured=('yes' or 'no') gallery=xxx (leave blank if 'featured=no') sig=~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
featured or not featured
For example:
[[:File:XXXXX.jpg]]
becomes
[[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured - Save your edit.
- If it is featured:
- Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
- Also add the picture to an appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
- Add the template {{Assessments featured=1}} to the image description page.
- If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments featured=1 com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
- If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments enwiki=1 featured=1}}
- Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg # - ''Headline''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx xxxxx]]
- The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
- You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg # - ''Headline''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx xxxxx]]
- Add FP promotion
{{FPpromotion File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
- As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2021), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Closing a delisting request[edit]
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
''Result:'' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg) - Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
delisted or not delisted
For example:
[[:File:XXXXX.jpg]]becomes[[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted - Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2021.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
- Remove the image from all categories beginning with 'Featured [pictures]' (example: Featured night shots, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
- Remove the 'Commons quality assessment' claim (d:Property:P6731) 'Wikimedia Commons featured picture' from the picture's Structured data.
- Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
- If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination[edit]
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a 'to be reviewed' template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following 'no' template:
{{FPC-results-reviewed support=X oppose=X neutral=X featured=no gallery= sig=--~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
not featured
For example:
[[:File:XXXXX.jpg]]
becomes
[[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured - Save your edit.
- Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2021), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.