Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates

Shortcut
This project page in other languages:

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates 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, 2021, 2022, 2023 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things edit

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:

  • Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs).
    • Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.
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:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

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.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Color is important. Oversaturated colors are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or color AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

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:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Simple tutorial for new users edit

Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC
How to nominate in 8 simple steps

STEP 1

  • STEP 1
    STEP 1

STEP 2

  • STEP 2
    STEP 2

STEP 3

  • STEP 3
    STEP 3

STEP 4

  • STEP 4
    STEP 4

STEP 5

  • STEP 5
    STEP 5

STEP 6

  • STEP 6
    STEP 6

STEP 7

  • STEP 7
    STEP 7

STEP 8

  • STEP 8 (last step)
    STEP 8 (last step)

NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you.

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:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".


Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

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:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Galleries and FP categories: 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: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports An image will only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

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 a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), 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:

  • {{Support}} ( Support),
  • {{Oppose}} ( Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} ( Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} ( Comment),
  • {{Info}} ( Info),
  • {{Question}} ( Question),
  • {{Request}} ( Request).

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:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

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:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}}  Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

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:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as a FP.
{{Delistandreplace}}  Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

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:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

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

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
  7. 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.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules edit

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven  Support votes (or 7  Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, they should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

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:Sumatran Ground-Cuckoo 0A2A4427.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 14:59:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • The Sumatran ground cuckoo is a critically endangered bird. There are fewer than 250 in the world right now and perhaps as few as 50, and those numbers are thought to be decreasing. It is one of the most endangered species in the world and there was not a single sighting of it for most of the twentieth century.
  • It is a ground forager, so even if it were a more common bird, it would be challenging to get a good photo.
  • This image is 21 megapixels and is not only the best image of the bird on Commons (indeed, the only one on Commons) but by a long way the best on the internet.

File:Common Moorhen 2023 11 11 03.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 13:42:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Rallidae (Coots, Rails and Crakes)
  •   Info A common moorhen (Gallinula chloropus). c/u/n by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 13:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Nothing like as good a composition as your existing FP. Too much stuff around the bird Also sensible to note in info if there is a similar existing FP for comparison. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:02, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Assuming this file is the other one we're talking about, I prefer this one. These birds hang out around fresh water, typically down low around the vegetation. The other, while still feature worthy, looks like the sort of composition I'd expect for a gull, cormorant, or sandpiper by the ocean rather than a moorhen/coot/gallinule. This one feels more natural, while the contrast between the bird's dark body and light ground provide sufficient separation to make up for bokeh. Those of you in Europe will have more experience with moorhens than me, but that's my impression. — Rhododendrites talk |  15:37, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support if we can afford 2 FPs of this bird. Yann (talk) 17:48, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 18:41, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support I think we can have 2 FPs. One with a cleaner background and one with a more contextualised one Cmao20 (talk) 18:44, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Eurasian Spoonbill Walking Ranganathittu Karnataka Jan24 A7C 09151.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 08:49:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Chester A. Arthur by Abraham Bogardus.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 06:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Rapids in mountain stream Brancla. 14-09-2023. (actm.) 08.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 05:35:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Caracas building.jpg (delist) edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 23:56:02
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

  •   Info According to this Village Pump discussion, the picture is actually faked -- seems like in reality the same facade looks (as of 2016) like this, few in common with the "sterile" view on the featured photo (also from 2016); that said, out of scope for me and cannot be kept as featured. (Original nomination)
  •   Delist --A.Savin 23:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist Yeah, sadly having read that discussion I'm pretty convinced the building never actually looked like this Cmao20 (talk) 00:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist Just zoom 400% and you'll notice that each pattern is exactly similar to the neighbor at a pixel level. It means that the puzzle has been created from scratch, the building does not exist, the number of rows and columns is fake. Misleading nomination (and picture of the day) because no {{Retouched}} template was indicated on the photo, nor on the voting page. Description was just "Building in downtown Caracas, Venezuela". It should be something like "Photo manipulation, same motif copy-pasted 990 times" (=56x18-18) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist , per comments above. - Jmabel ! talk 03:41, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist This is a work of computer art, not photographic art. WikiPedant (talk) 06:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist It is very deceiving that a long-term contributor submitted a fake image for FPC. Yann (talk) 08:26, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am not sure I understand your point. Are you complaining about the uploader or the user that nominated the file for FPC? From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:44, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Wilfredor should have mentioned this in the description prior to the nomination, and also in the nomination. By staying silent, he implicitly supported the nomination while commenting. Yann (talk) 10:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I can't talk when I'm sleeping, I replied in village pump how was this image created. Again inventing things in your head like that Che Guevara thing? Wilfredor (talk) 12:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Your comment that Yann linked above was made 3 days after you uploaded the image. Are you saying that by then you no longer remembered that the image was a manipulation, and thought instead that the striking uniformity was due to the obsession with order of the building's military personnel? --Julesvernex2 (talk) 12:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, I'm talking about the comment in this discussion. Wilfredor (talk) 12:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist according to nomination. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 08:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist --El Grafo (talk) 08:43, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist — Draceane talkcontrib. 09:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist ouch! --Aristeas (talk) 09:47, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist It is very disappointing when a fake image is passed off as real (except on 1 April). This was nominated for FP two weeks after it had been uploaded by Wilfredor. I assume Wilfredo forgot to add the retouched template on upload, treating the image as an artistic creation. But when it was nominated for FP by another user Wilfredo had every opportunity to explain, but didn't. That's not good. Are there others? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have always tried to be clear in my nominations about the alterations. In the past I uploaded my RAWs to the commons archive, but today that project does not exist and many Raws were lost. Leave a comment here to start a withdrawal process for all my FPs from these FP categories Wilfredor (talk) 12:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist in line of the village pump discussion. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist This image was created by linking several images with Hugin creating an unreal structure --Wilfredor (talk) 12:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist --Adamant1 (talk) 12:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist according to nomination. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 15:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist as the original nominator. ★ 15:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I would like to apologize for having uploaded this image and not having warned that it was an unreal image. Back then I was a different person than I am today, I think people change over time. 8 years ago I was living in the most corrupt country in the world and I wanted to show the world my annoyance at the destruction of this country, unfortunately I was no longer living there but it was not the right medium to upload a heavily digitally altered photo. When I uploaded this photo I remember seeing the result and I liked it as a way of expressing the dictatorial regime's obsession with controlling people. However, I assume my responsibility for this image that I consider false and I would like to clarify this very well. --Wilfredor (talk) 15:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pez lagarto diamante (Synodus synodus), franja marina Teno-Rasca, Tenerife, España, 2022-01-08, DD 42.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 21:33:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Jardim de Infância Ernestina Pessoa Vitória Espírito Santo Tiles 2019-5130.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 19:32:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Support Thanks. It could be good also to mention these "wall tiles" in the description in English and in Portuguese. I thought they were floor tiles at first sight, and had to search on Google -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support nice pattern. --Aristeas (talk) 10:34, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Interesting, eye-catching pattern. Pity the sharpness is not better – a clear case of wow factor over technical quality. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Wilfredor (talk) 13:03, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Karl Marx 001.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 15:31:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Enjoying fishing at sunrise.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 11:18:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

Palestine Rally: End The Siege, Stop the War on Gaza edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 10:07:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • I would oppose the first two because there are problems with the composition, the first one has a large out of focus area, the second has a blurred girl walking off the edge of the frame and isn’t particularly interesting anyway. The third is better composed. But I think the best of this photographer’s images of this protest is this because the composition is better, the sign is more interesting than in the third image you nominated and gives a sense of the context of the protest, and the expressions on the faces of the protestors, + the raised fist, add something. Cmao20 (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Perhaps not bad as documentary, but I don't see anything featurable, especially not as a set. Sorry. --A.Savin 12:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Please explain what you meant by featurable? Natsuikomin (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Not a set. Nothing special in composition. I have no idea what Commons rules are on political statements. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:24, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral The last picture is FP for me. ★ 13:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The first one is not FP, so not a set anyway. Yann (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Not as a set. The last one has potential, it looks like a focused and informative picture. --Thi (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes! @Natsuikomin: please, nominate this picture solo instead! ★ 01:24, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:UBTZ 2TE25KM-0455 Tyshljeg - Sainshand.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 08:37:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Australian brushturkey (Alectura lathami) female head Atherton.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 22:11:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Adeline Ravoux, by Vincent van Gogh, Cleveland Museum of Art, 1958.31.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 18:26:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Male Bush Elephant Head Trunk Up Kafue Jul23 A7R 05195.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 07:52:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Liver yellow dog in the water looking at viewer at golden hour in Don Det Laos.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 07:28:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:015 Wild Red Deer Switzerland Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 23:57:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Sorry but blown highlights are not "normal" at FPC. It certainly was a difficult shot, however, technically a back lit scene should be underexposed a few stops to avoid any burnt parts. There are several zones completely white, like in this nomination or that one -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'll have a closer look at it tonight once I'll have access to a computer Giles Laurent (talk) 11:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Done, new file uploaded (press cmd+R on keyboard to force refresh on a MacOS or F5 on Windows), I took care of highlights and CA. Giles Laurent (talk) 23:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support What lenses what used to perform this shoot? --Wilfredor (talk) 04:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you, it was captured with a Sony FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + a LensCoat to camouflage it Giles Laurent (talk) 10:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Did you use any scent on your body besides camouflage? Wilfredor (talk) 15:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I didn't use perfumes, in order to reduce chances of beeing detected as the animals could otherwise more easily detect me by smell. But it's impossible to completely erase human smell. So when possible, I also pay attention to the direction of the wind and try not having it going in the direction of the animal (but wind direction sometimes change). During mating season you often hear the red deers before you see them so you can know in what direction they are before you see them. Giles Laurent (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 11:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 14:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support JukoFF (talk) 16:04, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Yes, as Basile said, technically with flaws, but a nice action shot. I would have cropped it a bit left and right. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Strong support Great action shot! Please don't crop, the blurry elements in the foreground make the image especially appealing. Thanks for removing the CA's and highlights. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Royal Arcade, London 2023 03.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 21:36:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Ohio farmer David Brandt.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 20:03:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Afgevallen kastanje van een Tamme kastanje (Castanea sativa) 24-10-2021 (d.j.b.) 01.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 05:26:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Two puppies playing together one standing over the other at golden hour in Don Det Laos.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 05:21:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Those ones are caramel color, but we commonly find also blacks, whites... -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:São Paulo Metro, Bras Station 2.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 03:42:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Metro_stations
  •   Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 03:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support but why black and white? I think it's a good photo with a really striking composition but I think I'd like it more if it were in colour Cmao20 (talk) 19:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I wanted to focus on the silhouettes and the people, the colors distract from the chaotic essence. It also does not represent a happy scene, I like the effect of coming out of the dark and seeing the illuminated ending, like escaping from an underworld of train chaos towards the real world. Wilfredor (talk) 19:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment As the photo shows the station itself (and not the trains), I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link from Rail vehicles to Metro stations; I hope this is OK. The other good possibility would be the black-and-white gallery. Hope it helps, --Aristeas (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thanks, yes its a good idea Wilfredor (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Very heavy noise at 1600 ISO (and 1/3 underexposed) with this camera. No appreciable detail at full resolution. Also the picture looks over-processed, like with too much contrast and clarity. It would be fine for a picture taken one century ago, but not in 2024, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It was a APS-C, that why dont have the ultra quality of my last pictures, however, for a dark environment and this DoF, IMHO noise is ok. I could remove the noise, however, noise is information Wilfredor (talk) 02:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Noise is "random variation of brightness or color information". Probably not fixable in this case (similar to this one). Concerning the aperture, F/13 on a Nikon APS-C is equivalent to F/20 on a full frame camera. Certainly excessive in this situation if you want to freeze the people. Other problem: technically all the whites are gray -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:12, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral Very nice scene, but the f/13 is a double whammy - compared to f/8, it decreases sharpness due to diffraction and increases noise due to requiring a high ISO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:27, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral Very nice. Black-and-white is a good solution. But IMO too much noise. --XRay 💬 11:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Tomer T (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Резервоарско езерце југозападно од Ротино 1.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 22:45:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:003 Wild Alpine Ibex Sunset Creux du Van Mont Racine Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 22:37:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
  •   Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 22:37, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support JukoFF (talk) 23:01, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Great. --Laitche (talk) 23:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support How heavy these horns should be, on the head every day :-) Nice composition but the white balance seems a bit too cold in my view. the snow and the mountains are blue, the temperature should be increased a tad in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you! The sun was set and the whole ground was in the shadows everywhere on the ground (except in the sky) and it was getting pretty dark. The white balance was normal in this image. The snow just simply takes a blueish tint when it's in the shadow. If the ground would have still been in the light, it would have appeared white (or yellow because of golden light at that hour) while the parts in shadow would still appear blue. Here are some examples where you can observe this natural phenomenon (compare the color of snow in the shadow with the color of snow in the light : 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8. The only difference between this picture and these examples is that this picture has no part in the snow directly in the sun. That is probably why it might confuse you at first glance because there is no reference of how the snow is when it is the light. But the blueish tint of the snow when in shadow is completely natural and the white balance is accurate. Giles Laurent (talk) 08:25, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks for your explanations. I'm not saying your camera captured wrong colors, but that the overall aspect seems rather blue. There's a major difference with the examples you give: the contrast, and the reference colors. See this illustration to explain (can you believe A and B are the same color?). If you place a green box surrounded by reds, then you won't see this green the same color as near yellows. The problem is there is no part with sunlight, so the eyes cannot move between, and the brain cannot figure out what is white here. But perhaps the issue is also the exposure. I wonder if your image is not underexposed, because it appears quite dark. If not, maybe that's just the background which is the same color and intensity as the subject. Still I think the animal in its environment is interesting enough, even if the picture cannot be improved -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes that is precisely what I tried to explain (sorry if I was not clear) : as there is no sunlight in direct contact with the snow in this picture, there is no reference of the color on snow in light. This naturaly makes everything in the shadow look a bit blueish, especially the whites of the snow. But the white balance of the image is accurate. Also for the mountain you mentionned in the first comment, it is a natural phenomenom that the further away a mountain is, the more it fades into the color directly behind it (which is blue in most scenarios, including in this picture because the sun was already that down that there was already a start of a blue line at the horizon). This is often witnessed in Switzerland as there's often mountains in the distance. Here are some examples showing that the further a mountain is, the more it fades into the sky (into blue tint in most scenarios) : 1234. It is due to the fact that the further away mountains are, the more air particules are in the way. As for the exposure, the entire place was in the shadows and it was already quite dark. I can ensure that the picture exposure corresponds to what I saw with my eyes at that moment because of the sun setting and the shadows and I promise that the picture is not underexposed. Good photographs of animals in the dark tend to be rare because of the challenge of low light shooting. Luckily I had my f2.8 lense as I was prepared for such scenario. If I would turn up the exposure of this image, the result would not correspond to reality anymore and I would like this picture to stay close to it and to what I saw on that day. Giles Laurent (talk) 11:36, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
A camera cannot reach the range of contrasts discernible to the eye, however there are ultra-bright lenses which see better than the human eye, at reasonable speeds. From my point of view, it's good to take advantage of it, because it compensates -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:27, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, you're right for camera range of contrasts vs human eye but for this particular picture there was no direct sunlight anymore on the ground and sky was not bright in that direction and therefore the contrast between highlight and shadows was lower and the picture dynamic range was closer to human eye. Also this camera handles 15 stops of dynamic range, which is huge. Nevertheless I think I probably brightened the shadows area a bit in lightroom on this picture to bring the result closer to what could be seen with the eye but not much difference was needed. Giles Laurent (talk) 14:59, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pez cirujano (Zebrasoma desjardinii), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-19, DD 38.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 20:56:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:The White House by James Craig Annan.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 20:49:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Added my best suggestion for the right gallery Cmao20 (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you, too. IMHO this is a good gallery link, therefore I have taken the liberty to remove the question after it (to avoid confusion). --Aristeas (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Not the greatest photo ever ;–), but assuming that, as quoted in the description, this is “an important and early example of an image that is both a formal composition and casual snapshot”. Excellent restauration. --Aristeas (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support in line with Aristeas' stated reason; historically valuable. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:24, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 20:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 13:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Луна и море.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 18:58:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Mold on bread FoV 322um.tif edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 18:45:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Cathedral of Gniezno (20).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 14:00:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Thanks!   Support --Laitche (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Good composition, quality and light Cmao20 (talk) 17:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 17:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The bright light in the foreground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 06:12, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The ugly (industrial) lantern in the foreground seems to be the main subject of the photograph. Too distracting in the composition, in my opinion. I would suggest to propose an alternative with the building only in its blue hour sky. Two possibilities: 1) cropped at the bottom and unchanged width, 2) cropped at the bottom and tighter framing, from the right of the leftmost lantern to the left of the naked tree (2743 x 4268 px only but nice aspect). See notes -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose per others: distracting light and also for me a bit unbalanced composition. Sure the blue hour light is nice, but I'm missing something more. I'm sorry, but for me it's just QI. --Kadellar (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose as per others. The foreground light is distracting. Yann (talk) 11:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative edit

 
@Laitche, Cmao20, ArionStar, Charlesjsharp, Llez, Basile Morin, Kadellar, and Yann: new version uploaded. Tournasol7 (talk) 16:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Dr Abraham Verghese in 2023 06.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 11:10:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:The Lion nebula.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 01:18:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Astronomy#Nebulae
  •   Info As before when nominating this author’s work I would like to note that this image has not been created by NASA or a similar space agency, it is the work of an amateur photographer with an account on Commons using a commercially available camera, telescope and software. The author leaves his very interesting commentary on each image he creates on the file page. I don’t think this disclaimer is necessary - I would still support this image if it were created by the Hubble Telescope - but I wouldn’t be so interested in nominating it then. I think it’s wonderful that work like this is possible by a skilled amateur and that it’s being made available to us under a Commons compatible license. created by Ram samudrala - uploaded by Ram samudrala - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Seems very oversaturated when compared with others on Google search. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I think it is worth pointing out that I’m not sure categories like ‘oversaturated’ are really that meaningful in astrophotography. This image, like every image from the Hubble Space Telescope or the JWST, is false colour, it has started out black and white and the colour has then been added back by the author, who has observed the nebula over a long period of time (>60 hours) across all three colour channels using different filters and then used the dataset to reintroduce colour slowly by hand. This is not like an out of camera RAW or JPEG where the colour has been pumped up too high.
As for whether the colours are ‘correct’, this is subjective. They are certainly not ‘natural’ in the sense that this is not what the nebula would look like if you saw it by eye through a telescope, and in that sense the pics you have Googled are probably more ‘accurate.’ But neither is any image from Hubble or the JWST. When I first saw Jupiter through my own telescope I was surprised how muted the colours are compared to the glossy bright red of NASA photos. Some astrophotographers prefer to process their pictures to look as close to what they personally see out of a telescope as possible. Ram Samudrala prefers instead to use the ‘Hubble palette’, in which he tries to imitate the colour palette used by Hubble as closely as possible - in part because it is more aesthetically pleasing, in part because a wider colour palette allows more gradations of shades between bright and pastel, which allows him to bring out finer features of the nebula. He alludes to some of these choices in the notes on the image page. You are very welcome to vote against if you dislike the end product - FPC is subjective and if you hate it, you hate it. But I would like to point out to other potential voters that there is nothing ‘wrong’ about this authorial choice, it is merely that the author has chosen to produce a Hubble-style’ image more than a ‘natural colour’ image. Cmao20 (talk) 13:40, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Common ringed plover Saint-Jean-de-Monts 05.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 14:26:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus : Charadrius
  •   Info A common ringed plover (Charadrius hiaticula) in winter plumage, c/u/n by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 14:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 14:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Nice to get the twig and the pebble so that the bird is contextualised in its environment. And incredible resolution. I'd be inclined to crop out some of the blurry foreground. I know it's unavoidable with these lenses and pretty much standard for some types of bird photography but there's a little too much here for me. Cmao20 (talk) 15:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Made it a tighter crop to remove some of the foreground. -- Alexis Lours (talk) 16:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I won't vote against as I'm not neutral, but this seems much less sharp than the existing FP; the feet are obscured and there are distracting items in the image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes, its is not as sharp (granted, I do still think it is a sharp picture) due to not being run through AI sharpening software that leave obvious sharpening artefacts, especially on edges and feathers, as can be seen around the tail and near the legs of the photo you linked, but I could still run the image through a Topaz software or similar if that's the preferred look nowadays. As for the foreground, I feel like it gives a good idea of where the bird was foraging but I'll also let the other members decide on that. -- Alexis Lours (talk) 19:16, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Ermell (talk) 22:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 17:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Sweet bird, beautiful soft light, colours and bokeh. --Aristeas (talk) 20:23, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 22:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Not extremely sharp but correct focus and high resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 06:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support as per Aristeas and Basile. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:31, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Schnobby (talk) 09:39, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Black 1937 Volvo PV 51 in Lysekil 7 sepia.jpg, featured edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 10:33:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Well, it's been a very, very, very, very, very long time since anyone called me a girl(flicka)! :-D I'll take this in the (hopefully) happy and kind meaning it is given :-) ; but let me just caution you that using the words "duktig flicka" to/about any female in Sweden, is about the worst demeaning insult you can ever say, and I take it you are not familiar with our culture. (It's the same way you can't use the "n"-word in English about a black person if you are white.) --Cart (talk) 15:33, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Strike that. Terragio67, I first tried to laugh off your comment, because as a woman on a male forum you sometimes have to "go along to get along". But it didn't work. To refer to another user/editor/photographer as "our girl" is simply demeaning and misogynistic. It is comments like this that deters women from participating here. --Cart (talk) 05:38, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am deeply sorry that my words were misunderstood. However, you were right to ask for explanations about the "flicka" written in italics so as not to be linked to misunderstandings. The word flicka (actually) refers to your ten years of commitment to Wikimedia.
    For me Commons is the place where I grew a lot technically as a photographer: I hadn't learned so much in my life since I started collaborating on this platform. I don't want to name anyone in particular, the strength is precisely the diversity of all of us. Please don't see me as a misogynist, I love Agnes Monkelbaan's photos just like yours. Towards you, I feel admiration for the creativity in your works and this made me think of being in front of a open-minded photography artist. I am aware that creativity and technique are not always able to combine, but they can be improved in some way (I'm trying... |1, |2, |3, ...). This is why you are one of my points of reference here. I apologize if I have gone on too long, to avoid further misunderstandings I will conclude with two words towards you: Thank you. Terragio67 (talk) 08:49, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yeah, yeah... It's always we women who "misunderstand" the situation when a man does a small "funny" thing to show how much they appreciate us for our work. :-( Thanks and goodbye all! --Cart (talk) 10:19, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    This literally translated in English sounds super condescending. Nobody should ever have to face that and I'm sorry it happened to you, W.carter. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks SHB2000 Yes it is. It is the way you talk to a dog or a toddler who has just learned how to put on their socks. And the explanation for using those words sounds to me like a contrived constructed way of explaining a bad behavior and blaming it on me as "misunderstanding". This is what most women on the WikiProject have to endure. No matter how old, accomplished and skilled we are, a lot of men here will still think of us as "girls" - lesser users. With participants like this on FPC, it's not a forum I want to contribute to from now on. --Cart (talk) 10:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No user should ever have to feel inferior, but the fact that some people do is beyond appalling. Talent is something that comes irrespective of gender (and more broadly, race, nationality, sexual orientation or identity). It makes me want to quit this forum as well.
I guess it links to a more broader issue of male-defaultism on online projects and forums including this. Reflecting on this myself, I looked through every single one of my userpages and nowhere do I ever state that I'm a guy – but it's wild that many people assume I do (I don't get offended because I am), but when someone isn't, it ultimately leads to the perception of "Ooh woo, someone who isn't a guy here? Let's treat them 'special'" mentality, driving women away and repeating the cycle of a male-centric forum. It's a vicious never-ending cycle which is far too often overlooked – that needs to change. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think that discussions like this contribute to the lack of gender diversity in our space. The original message, although possibly intended as humorous, perpetuates a narrative of inferiority towards women. This not only reflects deep-rooted prejudices but also creates an unwelcoming and tiresome environment. I would like to ask that we avoid these types of comments in the future. I'm not speaking as a defender of anyone, as each person is perfectly capable of defending themselves. My point is about the respect and inclusion that we all deserve. If we want to evolve beyond being a homogeneous group, it's crucial to recognize and change these dynamics. Diversity enriches our perspectives and strengthens our collective. It's time to leave behind behaviors and jokes that, although they may seem harmless, have a negative undertone in our environment Wilfredor (talk) 11:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I would like to express my full agreement with SHB2000's statement. Condescending behavior towards people is despicable intolerable and upsets me. At the Wikimania last year in Singapore, diversity was at the top of the list of goals we all need to work on. There are cultures in the world where diversity has been taken for granted for generations, but the Western culture is still struggling. Diversity and full respect for each other should be a matter of course, especially in today's Internet forums. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you to the users who have spoken out here, and chose to not be part of the great silent majority. A few decades ago, I would have been on the barricades about this, but now I'm old (like grandma old) and I don't even feel angry or outraged, I just feel a great sadness that we have not come further in matters like this. --Cart (talk) 13:18, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Radomianin, @Wilfredor, @SHB2000, @W.carter and anyone interested in this chatː
Thanks for continuing the discussion. I honestly didn't realize the consequences of what was supposed to be a cross between a witty joke and an expression of sympathy towards W.carter. I'm really sorry for having diminished importance and made female representation on Commons feel embarrassed because of me; rarely happens because of the fault of those who spread the message, but this time it's clear that it's only my fault. What I can say is that I don't really believe in these terms, that someone is inferior to someone else or that they should feel inferior for any reason. I hope you can understand my mistake and everyone accepts my apology, especially W.carter. Terragio67 (talk) 13:16, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Well, you can always take over all of my work here at FP and FPC, since I won't be here to do it. --Cart (talk) 13:23, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I don't think I'm up to your level as a photographer and as a person. It was your personality that fascinated me. I prefer the opposite to happen. Terragio67 (talk) 13:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Post Scriptum: I suggest and authorize the Wikimedia Commons Administrators to use my mistake regarding W.carter at the next Wikimania meeting as an example, hoping it can be avoided in the future by other careless people as I myself have proven to be. Terragio67 (talk) 13:43, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm not vindictive, so please stay, develop as a photographer and person. Your thoughtless action only revealed what is always lurking just beneath the surface here at FPC, how men behave online. I'll go and dabble with my photos somewhere I enjoy. It doesn't matter how many good words we speak here, how people say the want to discuss this at greater forums and so on. None of this will ever change. Ever! In a few days time this discussion will be archived and out of sight. People will forget it even happened. Women will go on contributing to the Wikis behind male user names to get some peace, and those few of us who reveal who we are are going to get "the usual" treatment. --Cart (talk) 13:48, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Cart, I hate to see you leave again, you’re a talented artist and I hope that someday you find good enough reasons to return. In the meantime, unless you’re sure of ill-intent, please consider accepting Terragio67's apologies. To my eyes, the italicised flicka and the explanation it referred to your ten-year tenure at Wiki Commons seems plausible, or at least worthy of the benefit of the doubt. I also extend the request of assuming good faith to those that commented above: “deep-rooted prejudices”, “despicable behaviour” and “driving women away” are serious accusations not be thrown around lightly. It’s not obvious to me how a single italicised word can warrant them. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 15:57, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Julesvernex2, I came back here to see if my eyes worked ok after the operation. I wanted to see if I could now edit photos skillfully again. I got caught up in the work, and I stayed longer than I had intended. It was good to get this reminder that nothing has changed here since the last time I was active at FPC, and I need to get out of here now. If you haven't been at the other end of situations like this, you don't know what you are talking about. It's not about one word, it's the whole sentence. He could just as well have patted me on the head, something most women don't take kindly to. If someone wrote "Our boy is pretty clever!!!" (which, btw, is a more accurate translation but with a gender twist of what was written) on a review of your photos (or Charles, Poco, A.Savin, etc.), what do you think the reaction would have been? Or is this such a common way of men to speak, you don't even think about it. I hold no grudge against Terragio67, and I accept his apology, even if the explanation sounds a bit too much like an after-construct. I do however hold a grudge against the "male ways" of FPC. But most of you already know that. --Cart (talk) 16:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Cart, if that had happened to me I would be more confused than anything else, as only a couple of users known my gender ('Jules Verne Times Two' is a collective). I'm not questioning the impact this issue had on you, I take that as a fact. I'm merely pointing out that, in this particular case, I think there's room to assume good faith. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • To keep things simple, I often use the gender the user name indicates to me (if possible) if I don't know the user's real name, until I learn otherwise. I didn't know it stood for a collective as I didn't think it was within the rules of Commons for people to share a user name. --Cart (talk) 17:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Julesvernex2, what you call accusations are descriptions of what is happening here. The intentions of Terragio67 are irrelevant. Even if we believe in his best intentions, look at what is happening: A woman IS being driven away by behavior that is condescending and as such despicable. And at the root of it are social prejudices that are widely accepted on this page. Kritzolina (talk) 16:35, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Hello Kritzolinaǃ I don't think my intentions were perceived as anything but irrelevant. My intentions of esteem and sympathy towards a female person were constructed in an underestimated and superficial way. This has created an alleged attitude of superiority which, I swear, I don't believe.
    I firmly believe that I foolishly was the straw that broke the camel's back. I am very happy that you participated in the discussion, for the moment I can only apologize also to you as a woman potentially offended by the current situation suspending myself from the Wikimedia Commons. Terragio67 (talk) 17:43, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No Terragio67, you're not going anywhere. You're staying on Commons where you will continue to do good work and never mess up again. That is how you amend this. --Cart (talk) 17:56, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Intentions are certainly not irrelevant, Kritzolina, much as wilfully driving into a person is treated differently than accidentally running over one, despite the same result. Understanding intent is critical to solving this issue, throwing questionable logic at it is not. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Intentions become relevant once we think about consequences for the perpetrator. No one is talking about this. We are talking about the results of the condescending language here. And those, as you state yourself, are the same. Kritzolina (talk) 17:34, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, we're well past the results, as unfortunately Cart has signalled her intent to leave (although I still harbour some, perhaps misplaced, hope that she will return), and the key issue left is to understand the consequences. When I put myself in Terragio67's shoes, I am mortified by this discussion. Seemingly without precedent, based on a single word, disregarding intent, and glossing over multiple attempts to explain and apologise, he was unceremoniously placed in the same category as others that have made far worse comments in this forum (and have not apologised). It would be the saddest of ironies if, in our attempts to increase inclusion, we brought exclusion instead. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 18:53, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That one thoughtless word was probably the straw that broke the camel's back, as Terragio67 said. In my opinion, this discussion reflects the shortcomings of our society. We cannot marginalise anyone and we must treat each other with respect so as not to achieve the opposite of what we want. Unfortunately, we men are in the majority here, so it is up to us to set a good example. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:21, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Intentions are irrelevant – what happened to Cart happened, and saying "it is meant to be lighthearted" or "it was a joke" does not change anything – words kill, regardless if it was a "joke". Using your exact same rationale, you're saying that casual racism is okay because the perpetrator had no intentions? I hope you're being serious here because there's a long road to go if you think casual racism is okay – the same applies to casual misogynistic comments. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
SHB2000, I'll do my best to put into practice my own preachings and assume good faith here. I'll assume you are not calling me a racist. I'll assume that the straw man of turning my statements into an excuse for casual racism and casual misogyny is the result of clumsiness and not disingenuity. Intentions were indeed irrelevant for Cart, much as they were irrelevant for the person ran over in my example above: the damage is done and no one can take it back. But intentions are relevant for what happens next. I see only two options: a) we can demonstrate that Terragio67's joke was indeed misogynistic, and he is made to face the full consequences of his actions; b) we cannot demonstrate it, you and others retract the allegations made above, and in the future Terragio67 heeds the advice that Cart and Kritzolina have included below. As you rightly point out, words kill, and yours are no exception. Please bear that in mind before tying serious accusations to somebody's name, nothing is ever erased from the Internet. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For the record, I'm not calling anyone here a racist because no one is. I merely brought it up as an example. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see a false dichotomy here, Julesvernex2. The joke is misogynistic, even if Teragio67 didn't mean for it to be misogynistic. The impact and effect perpetuate misogyny. The intentions might have been different, that is why we don't need to think about consequences for Terragio67, who is taking responsibility for his actions anyways. Calling an action racist or misogynist doesn't equal accusing the acting person a racist or sexist person. We all act racist or misogynist at times (yes all of us) and calling out these actions as inappropriate is an important way of moving forwards towards a world with less racism and misogyny. Kritzolina (talk) 10:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm running out of ways to explain my position, but I'll keep trying as long as I sense there's genuine interest in making things right. I'm indeed defending a dichotomy, but not the one you described. I'm not cataloguing people as misogynist or not misogynist, racist or not racist, evil or good: I was careful, both in this discussion and in others, not to use ad hominem arguments. I also started by acknowledging the impact Terragio67's actions had on Cart, irrespective of intent. Where I disagree from you and others is in thinking that the current muddled state of affairs is an acceptable compromise. It is unlikely that anyone that bumps into this discussion will have the patience to read the full thing, and will instead stop at the horrible accusations made above and assume them to be true, since they appear to be representative of the consensus view. So here's the dichotomy I advocate for: either demonstrate that Terragio67's comment was misogynistic and stand by your accusations; or accept his explanation that it was a reference to tenure and not gender, and retract. Anything in the middle is vengeance, not justice. I'm surprised to have to reiterate this, but online words have real-life consequences. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 12:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think your position is very clear, but it also sounds like a very black and white position. Our actions are usually in the grey zone. This is not a court where we are to judge guilty or not guilty, it's a discussion in which people are not good or bad, right or wrong, but simply human. We make mistakes, small and big, this way and that. Quest like this to find absolute truths are also what makes the tone here at FPC so hard, almost military. I think what we need is more diplomacy. A compromise is not always a bad thing, it's a way of getting along and moving forward. --Cart (talk) 13:16, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Indeed, advocating for transparency and objective (not absolute) truth is a black and white position, and I stand by it. I don't think that's one of the (many) problems with FPC, but I stand to be corrected. I agree that we need less judgment and more diplomacy, but fail to see how anything that happened here is a step in that direction. In any case, I think we both made our positions clear, so allow me to reiterate a couple of things: i) I'm sorry this happened to you; ii) I will keep an eye on your uploads as a proxy for the inspiration that you will no longer provide here. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 15:09, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Adding on to what Cart said as well as to my last post. For me the comment that started all this very clearly IS misogynistic. It talked about a grown woman as a child, giving praise in a way one would not even give to a child in a good educational setting. Even a child would feel grown ups are not taking it seriously, if someone talked to the child like this. This perpatuates the misogynistic narrative that women are childlike and need male guidance. And yes, online words have real-life consequences, just like you said. A comment like this has misogynistic impact.
We can state that it was a misogynistic comment and at the same time accept Teragio67s explanation that this was not what he intended. This way we can move on in the hope this incident will not repeat itself. Everyone reading this CAN understand that this kind of comment is not acceptable here.
If we do NOT lable the behaviour (NOT the person!!!) as misogynist, the learning for some would be that this kind of comment is okay as long as you claim afterwards you did not mean it that way. This is the outcome I am trying to prevent. Kritzolina (talk) 13:37, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Having been mostly absent from Commons for some days, I see the progress of this discussion only now. I confess that initally I did not understand the severity of this issue – seems I share the same male view (or blindness). I am horrified that you leave again, Cart, being driven away by our male misbehaviour – be it malicious or thoughtless, it is in any case wounding and disgusting. I condemn discrimination, despicable, condescending and dis-inclusive behaviour. However I cannot just blame Terragio67, as his comment was just a symptom of our collective male attitude. I can’t exclude myself, as I often share the thoughtless behaviour. How can we really improve this to the better? For now I can just say sorry to you, Cart. --Aristeas (talk) 17:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Julesvernex2: Thank you for your mediative notes, I have retracted my use of the term despicable and used the more diplomatic term intolerable. My own experiences and those of family and friends have made me very sensitive when it comes to unfairness. @W.carter: Personally, I am very sad to see you leave the FPC forum, I consider your contributions a very valuable enrichment to the FP media library. But I respect your decision, even though I consider your absence to be a great loss for the FP project. @Kritzolina: Even if the fight against social prejudice often seems like a fight against windmills, personally I'll not be prepared to give it up. @Aristeas: I agree with your statement that, as a man, I can't take myself out of the equation, because too often I also have silently accepted questionable comments and not written a reply. It has always been my opinion that a greater diversity of reviewers is more healthy for the forum, because in variety lies the power to counteract old prejudices. I regret that I am partly responsible for this step backwards. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Hey guys, instead of trying to make me stay, how about you try to consciously start working on how to make the general atmosphere at FPC less male-toxic so that the forum might attract more women? Make it more like a social meeting place and less like the man cave it is today. To use a (sort of) sports metaphor you might understand: "If you build it, they will come." Who knows, maybe I'll be back too if you do it right. Btw, nobody is asking Terragio67 to leave. I've written here twice that he should stay. I doubt very much he will make the same mistake again. No one is being excluded. --Cart (talk) 19:41, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I've just seen this discussion. I'm sorry you had to see this comment, Cart. It definitely comes across as a clumsy attempt at a compliment that ended up being thoughtless and patronising, and I would not want a close female friend or relative to be spoken to in that infantilising way. In terms of your comment here, what do you think we can do - besides avoiding obvious faux pas like this - to make this forum less of a 'man cave'? Cmao20 (talk) 19:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am not Cart, but I also sometimes get the same kind of feelings of being in a "man cave". I see two things men active on this page can do. One is happening right now here - a number of men speak up and signal that they do not endorse the behavior that let to the current situation. One other thing everyone can do is looking into what kind of language they use before hitting the sind bottom. Is it patronizing in any way? Is there anything that sounds like mansplaining? Are you using sexualized language for motifs that are not about sexuality? And again, if you see someone else doing any of these things - step in, speak up.
    And well, there is a third thing you can do - don't just look to women for guidance on how to do better. Educate yourself about feminism. Kritzolina (talk) 20:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I just got a note from a male friend saying I'm a DIVA and I should stay because men need female guidance to not turn forums into man caves. (A misunderstanding, I've been reprimanded about, sorry, but my reasons still stand) So first, see my comment above about me wanting to see if my eyes work and I hadn't planned on staying this long. Second, I think men are smarter than that, otherwise we women wouldn't love them as much as many of us do. An advice is to "fake it 'till you make it". Write and express yourselves as if your wife/girlfriend/sister/daughter was reading it too. That is probably a good way to check your language. And if you see another user of whatever gender making what you think is a bad comment, don't stay silent, just ask them to please behave. Last, be openminded to new photo areas and photography styles, things that people outside FPC are so fond of photographing. --Cart (talk) 21:14, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thank you to Cart and Kritzolina for the helpful and personal suggestions for finding a way to show more awareness to help soften the man cave. Being kind, polite, and mindful on FPC helps to create a better climate. No longer being silent when an inappropriate comment is posted should become a prime directive for everyone to improve our forum. We should remember that the Wikimedia Foundation always upholds these values, but we don't have a supervisor to discipline us, so we users in the community have to do it ourselves! -- Radomianin (talk) 21:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Because B&W can often look rather hard and contrast-y, I think the sepia tone goes better with the curved lines of the car and the ivory colored buttons, levers, dials, etc. that are on the dashboard. --Cart (talk) 22:11, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:07, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 22:42, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:34, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 06:08, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Very   Weak support -- I like the "fish-eyeish" reflection in the light, but otherwise I have to confess that neither vintage cars nor any kind of photographic filters are my cup of tea, so it's difficult for me to evaluate this picture completely. The above discussion is of course noteworthy. --A.Savin 22:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 13:10, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Filters

File:024 Aerial view of Jakobshavn Glacier at Disko Bay (Greenland) Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg, featured edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 08:43:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 13:14, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Greenland

File:Squelette de mammouth laineux (Mammuthus primigenius) en plastique phosphorescent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 08:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Foggy sunrise in High Fläming Nature Park1.jpg, featured edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 06:13:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Confirmed results:
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 13:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#Brandenburg

File:Foggy sunrise in High Fläming Nature Park2.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 06:11:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:VitorJubini Gastronomia Anchieta ES (39080737410).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2024 at 19:17:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Meals (food and drink)
  •   Info Moqueca capixaba dish served in Anchieta, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created by Vitor Jubini (MTur Destinos) - uploaded by Sintegrity - nominated by ★ -- ★ 19:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- ★ 19:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Typical cacerola for this type of food and an environment where I can sometimes taste the salt of the sea in my mouth. Please ask me to join you --Wilfredor (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak support It could be a lot sharper but I like the composition, having the tablecloth in the foreground and the beach in the background provides a nice contrast of colours and it's suitable for a seafood dish. Cmao20 (talk) 20:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support A very tasty-looking dish in a good setting. (I've fixed it up a bit with sharpness, light and contrast for you.) Nice find. --Cart (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Moqueca capixaba is a traditional dish in my native state Espírito Santo, consumed especially during Easter. ★ 00:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Mouth watering dish well photographed --Kritzolina (talk) 07:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 08:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Great find! Detail resolution could be even better, but it’s well-arranged, has good colours and is, above all, appetizing. Thanks to Cart for the edit! --Aristeas (talk) 09:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support per Aristeas. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Good shot, but still somewhat soft, plus the setting (tablecloth, background) looks rather unprofessional and random to me, though I admit this might be difficult for improvised outdoor pictures of food. --A.Savin 13:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am not the creator of this photo, but, as a capixaba who I am, I suspect it was taken at a seaside restaurant; so I believe it is really more difficult than a studio photo. ★ 14:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's difficult to predict but I believe that the back is the sea Wilfredor (talk) 04:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It is probably on an outdoor table at a beachfront restaurant, common on the Espírito Santo coast. ★ 12:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak oppose I agree, it lacks sharpness, the setting is unconvenctional but still ok to me Poco a poco (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 06:05, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Son Doong Cave DB (2).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2024 at 18:10:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Vietnam
  •   Info created and uploaded by Dave Bunnell, nominated by Yann
  •   Support Zoom in and check the man to have an idea of the scale. This is one of biggest cave in the world. And we don't have many FPs from Vietnam. -- Yann (talk) 18:10, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support per nomination, a very impressive place. Cmao20 (talk) 20:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Sorry, an interesting cave, but the light is flat and not optimal to show the cave in a spectacular way. Even with the man (once you've found him), you don't really get a feel for the size of the place. Not well edited in post either, cloning/stitching errors at the borders, I'm comparing with our other FP caves at: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Caves, (you might want to change the gallery to that). Edited version if you want it. --Cart (talk) 21:58, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks. I have asked Dave if he agrees with overwriting with your version. If no answer, I will propose an alternative. Yann (talk) 10:04, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • No problem, good original to work with, but I don't think my version should be used to overwrite the original as it changes it too much. --Cart (talk) 10:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't understand the gallery "Natural phenomena#Caves". IMO caves are not phenomena, but places. A phenomena is a an event which takes place at a particular time. Yann (talk) 18:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)´Reply[reply]
  • In a wider sense in English, a natural phenomena can also mean something spectacular and long-lasting that has been formed by completely by nature. I guess those who created that page went with the Wikipedia definition of the term. See: List of natural phenomena. The word "phenomena" often means a bit different things in different languages. I sure wouldn't try to implement how it is used in Swedish here. ;-) --Cart (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Well, English WP definition says A natural phenomenon is an observable event which is not man-made. I will stick with the current gallery. Yann (talk) 18:59, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The list includes 'erosion', and caves are a subsection of Erosion landforms. The 'Natural phenomena' gallery page included even more things before, but as we've got more FPs they have been moved into new galleries. Look, I know we are in a sort of "don't use gallery pages created by Cart movement" right now, but this is not something I've made, it's been like that for years long before I started helping out with the galleries. The caves were on the 'Others' section earlier on the "natural phenomena" page, but as more of them got promoted, a section for them was created. You are of course free to select a gallery page, but to me it makes sense to have photos caves gathered in one place. --Cart (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your edited version increases the saturation too much in relation to what the cave actually looks like, IMHO. 206.123.195.165 01:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh! That was unintentional, I never touched the saturation just worked with the light a bit. It was probably a side-effect from not pushing the whites so much plus some contrast. I've de-saturated the version a bit to compensate. Thanks for your comment. --Cart (talk) 11:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cmao20 and W.carter: See alternative below. Yann (talk) 18:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alt edit

 

File:Windows of the gazebo (Hakkakutei) at Shitennō-ji Honbō Park, January 2024 - 6640.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2024 at 17:29:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • @Cart:I think that is not my ghostly hand. I hid and using the remote controller when releasing the shutter. So I think those are trees reflected in the glass. --Laitche (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Haha! So sorry! It looks just like a hand. :-) Anyway,   Support from me too. --Cart (talk) 22:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Poco a poco: Thanks for the comment. About 30 minutes before I took this shot, there was a period of about 10 minutes when that reflection did not occur, but I missed it. I'll try again, but I won't be able to get the shot unless the lighting is good, so I am not sure if I can nominate an alternative. --Laitche (talk) 23:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Poco a poco: Today, I've checked from 2 hours before I took this shot to 1 hour after, but there was no time period when reflections did not occur. It seems I was wrong. There is a pond behind the camera so the surface of the pond always seems to be reflected. I uploaded one that focuses on the back window, but I don't nominate an alternative since the current nomination is better. If someday I can take a version without reflections in a different season, I'll add Delist and Replace :-) --Laitche (talk) 14:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Poco a poco: I also wanted a version without reflections, then I did it. I don't think I'd go that far if it was just for you ;-) --Laitche (talk) 18:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Bad Saarow asv2022-08 img19 Bf Bad Saarow.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2024 at 12:34:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Train stations
  •   Info Listed railway station building in Bad Saarow, Brandenburg, c/u/n by me. --A.Savin 12:34, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --A.Savin 12:34, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Excellent quality but IMO a bit underexposed and not great composition, the bin is a little unfortunate and so is the slightly limp position of the flag. I think you have a lot of better photos than this Cmao20 (talk) 14:02, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Somewhat narrow view. I would support as Quality image. --Thi (talk) 14:21, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:09, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Phoenix CZE (talk) 16:59, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 18:17, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 19:16, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Just a QI for me. Bushes and sign hiding the entrance, foreground with garbage distracting, average composition cropped on both sides. Good light but the building is not incredible -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Юрий Д.К 07:30, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Agree with some of the critical points (e.g. midtones could be a tiny bit brighter). However looking the 3rd or 4th time at this photo in full size, it still wows me – there is something about the light, the peaceful mood and the building I reall like. --Aristeas (talk) 10:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Per Basile. -- Karelj (talk) 16:14, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Man playing Brazilian folk music of Recife.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 17 Jan 2024 at 04:48:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  Done Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 12:41, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wilfredor I remember that instrument from File:Man playing an acoustic brazilian guitar (Violão) on Marco Zero Square, Refice, Pernambuco, Brazil.jpg. I'm wondering if it would qualify as a pt:Viola caipira (Category:Viola caipira)? The 10 tuners mean that it's supposed to have 10 strings and and what's left of the saddle seems to indicate that they were to be used in pairs. Resonator type versions seem to exist (scroll down) ... El Grafo (talk) 15:00, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:At Chester Zoo 2023 019 - Komodo Dragon.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2024 at 22:05:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

Cropped version edit

 

  • Thanks for the feedback above, here's a cropped version for consideration. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 20:53, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Idk if it'll pass because FPC does tend to be quite harsh on zoo images as opposed to images taken 'in the wild' but I think this is FP to me now Cmao20 (talk) 21:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support The alternative is definitely an improvement to the composition, thanks for the edit. I think FP's of wild animals in their natural habitat have more authentic value than those of captive ones. However, zoo animals are just as illustrative and can be a valuable addition to articles in certain contexts. Therefore, I consider that well-made photos of this type have a right to be featured. After all, we also have domesticated creatures such as cats and dogs in the FP library. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Zoo image with less than FP composition and technical quality. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:19, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    • @Charlesjsharp: Can you be more specific with your composition and technical quality points please, so I can avoid them when taking future photos? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You are looking down on the animal; I guess that might be the only way in this zoo. The cut branches in the foreground are a distraction and not natural. The animal's surroundings are ordinary; no feeling that it is anywhere but in a zoo. It's not your fault, but the dead tree trunk and huge rock are very non-Komodo Island. The focus is probably on the head but the nose and tail are out of focus; that's partly due to the huge depth of field needed when an animal is in this sort of position relative to the camera. The nose is over-exposed. The choice of camera settings is strange. 1/40 sec has probably introduced motion blur (or camera shake) and the choice of 30mm lens has meant you had to crop. I don't know what spec/make lens you are using but the EOS 90D should not be this low quality at your chosen ISO. I would have expected better definition from my 80D. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:48, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Charlesjsharp: Thanks, that's helpful. It was with a Sigma 17-50mm F2.8 EX DC OS HSM lens, under low light conditions, and I didn't have much time to capture this facial expression (see the other photos I've uploaded in this series). I guess you'd have recommended a higher ISO and shorter exposure? Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 23:08, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I've never used Sigma but the reviews are good and F6.3 seems fine. I've experimented with low shutter speeds on monopod/bean bag with my 100mm lens and it doesn't work for me. I used ISO 800 as my ready-to-go ISO on my EOS 80D. But No. 1 hint: Wait for better light! Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:52, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks for the feedback. I generally find ISO 800 to be too noisy, and in circumstances like these no waiting will provide better light. Let's see how consensus turns out. Thanks. Mike Peel (talk) 22:25, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose I don't mind photos of animals in zoos, as long as they "wow" me and are done in a way that doesn't look like they are made there. Here unfortunately, most of us can recognize the slightly messy environment as typical for a zoo. The top-down perspective and no good light to help the scene are also unfortunate. --Cart (talk) 16:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Per Cart. — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Taking photos in a zoo may have limitations, you cannot get close to the animal to take a photo. I think the shot is acceptable but my vote is mainly for the unique expression of the animal. --Wilfredor (talk) 11:34, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Per @Wilfredor. I don't mind you didn't capture the whole zoo vibe, forget about the zoo gate and the cage glass. And I think this is why we also have picture description for every FPC candidate. Natsuikomin (talk) 02:17, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:08, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 13:54, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:A black-headed gull - Geneva lake (january 2024).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2024 at 20:56:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Flo dans Juvsøyla à Rjukan, Norvège.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2024 at 19:32:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual snow sports
  •   Info created by Valentin Chapuis, uploaded and nominated by Yann
  •   Support Not very big, but I think the action makes for that. -- Yann (talk) 19:32, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support A small, but excellent photo. I like it very much; I'm getting a bit tired of all the "man standing on mountain" photos that are so popular. Hope you don't mind me fixing the spelling, the Scandi languages can be a bit tricky. --Cart (talk) 19:55, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak support definitely striking but I think it's almost certainly downsampled Cmao20 (talk) 22:07, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Strong support As someone who already practices this type of sports and knowing how difficult it is to take a photo in these conditions --Wilfredor (talk) 02:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment The picture produces a greater impact when rotated 90 degrees CCW (head at the top, feet at the bottom). Unfortunately really small resolution and no metadata (like all the images imported from this site) -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Yes, small – but stunning. Again it’s a pity that metadata are missing, but at least we have a colour space tag (sRGB) this time, that’s the most important hint. --Aristeas (talk) 11:05, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 20:55, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Ermell (talk) 21:23, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

*  Support In full screen mode my vertigo sets in and I get clammy palms. Great capture! -- Radomianin (talk) 22:18, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@W.carter, Cmao20, Wilfredor, Basile Morin, and Aristeas: @Christian Ferrer, Ermell, Radomianin, SDudley, and Llez: @Poco a poco: I propose also a rotated version. Yann (talk) 13:03, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •   Oppose In favor of the alt version. I took me a while to "orientate" this shot. — Draceane talkcontrib. 12:14, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alt edit

 

File:Mourning dove camouflage (76255).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2024 at 18:59:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Columbidae_(Pigeons_and_Doves)
  •   Info Trying to capture the natural camouflage of a mourning dove on the forest floor. Everyone who lives in their range has probably had the experience of accidentally startling doves hidden on the ground. Obviously not going for bokeh/separation here, so might not be right for FPC, but we'll see. all by — Rhododendrites talk |  18:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support — Rhododendrites talk |  18:59, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment What causes that strange glow/halo effect around the leaves in the foreground, and can it perhaps be reduced? Cmao20 (talk) 19:46, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Not my sort of composition and the foreground does need some work. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:21, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   New version uploaded - Removed a bunch of halos. — Rhododendrites talk |  17:27, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Oddly enough, almost the same sort of composition as in Famberhorst's nom, and we seem to go crazy over that. I don't see how this is any different now that the foreground is taken care of. WB seems a bit cold though, would it be appropriate to turn up the heat a smidgen, or would that ruin the natural colors. --Cart (talk) 23:34, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Famberhorst's fungi don't fly very often, so you have to catch them on the ground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:55, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I do think the light and colours are a lot better in Famberhorst's picture than in this one. His picture is also a lot sharper. But I'm still unsure which way to vote here. Cmao20 (talk) 02:01, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Sorry, depth of field too shallow. The body is out of focus. Only a tiny part of the head is in focus in this image. Also the light is not so great -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Why are we all commenting? I feel commenting is where you hope the image can be improved. The foreground has been improved but I still don't like the background nor DoF. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:13, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose I was commenting because I was genuinely unsure how to vote, but I think, having looked at this one many times, I don't think it is FP to me. I think it is a good QI of a bird showing camouflage and it was definitely worth a try but there it is a very common bird in very messy and untidy surroundings. Plus I still don't rly like the foreground, it's not just the haloes (which I can still see a few of) but the fact that the leaves have this weird smudgy glow to them that I've never seen before and don't really understand. I'm sorry to shoot this one down like this. I generally like your bird pics (and other pics) a lot, Rhododendrites Cmao20 (talk) 13:58, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:View of Abeno Harukas and Shitennō-ji five-storied pagoda at dusk, January 2024 - 9978.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2024 at 17:52:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • @Cmao20: Thanks for the comment. I also think portraite is rather than landscape in this case. First of all, the view of Abeno Harukas and the five-storied pagoda from this angle is into against the sun during the day times. So I went to this location for sunset shots, and I've taken this photo. Immediately after I took this photo, the streetlight (you can see in that photo) came on, so I was no longer able to take pictures from that position, so I moved the camera position about 5 meters to avoid the streetlight. Then Abeno Harukas and the five-storied pagoda became too far apart and I couldn't take a portrait, so I switched to a landscape. After that, I took some photos of the twilight and dusk and some night scenes. When I got home and looked at it on my PC, I found the dusk shot to be the best, so I nominated it. By the way, I think this position is the only location where they can see Abeno Harukas and the five-storied pagoda from this angle from the ground. It is inevitable that trees block the architecture. It would be possible to take pictures from the roof of a nearby building without being blocked by the trees, but such places are off-limits and the doors are locked, so they cannot climb or enter. That's the reason why I nominate this one, so please think about it. --Laitche (talk) 07:30, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support While this is indeed not the most intriguing composition, it’s still good for me – it was most important to get both buildings side by side in the frame, and that has been achieved here. Therefore the juxtaposition of classic and modern Japanese architecture works excellently, the blue hour and beautiful lighting give it a wonderful touch. --Aristeas (talk) 11:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I may be out of line here, but it seems to me that if you are going to tell a story of "Two Towers", it might be effective to go for just them, and little else, with a bit of Star Wars style. ;-) (Of course, such a photo would have to use the {{Retouched}} tag since the top of the sky is added.) What do you think? --Cart (talk) 17:38, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I would support this version as a more daring and thoughtful composition. Cmao20 (talk) 19:06, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Not me because crop too tight -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:35, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks Cmao20. @Cart, Thanks for the proposal. I think your suggestion is a good idea. But your version is too tight as Basile Morin said, so I made the wider and cloned version of your suggestion and compared it to the original, but I thought the original was better, so I won't nominate the alternative.　Thanks for your kindness :) --Laitche (talk) 09:45, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Cart, @Cmao20, @Basile Morin:I changed my mind, so I nominated the alternative, Regards. --Laitche (talk) 10:59, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative edit

 

  •   Weak support FPC seems weirdly quiet at the moment, and I don't know whether people will notice a nomination this far down the list, so I'll change my vote to support to make sure it gets promoted. The more I look at this crop the more I think it is valid for FPC. I still prefer Cart's idea because it is a bolder and more daring choice that focusses tightly on the contrast between the two buildings. But I appreciate the effort you've put in to trying to improve this nomination. Cmao20 (talk) 13:50, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Fontfroide Granatäpfel.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2024 at 17:00:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#France
  •   Info Pomegranates in the garden of of Fontfroide Abbey in the Aude department, France,
    created, uploaded and nominated by Palauenc05 -- Palauenc05 (talk) 17:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Palauenc05 (talk) 17:00, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support I wasn't sure if the composition was too busy at first but the more I look the more I like it. The square crop is a good choice. I could see this hanging on someone's wall. Cmao20 (talk) 18:50, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Sorry, but the tight crop + obscured view makes a composition that doesn't work for me. — Rhododendrites talk |  19:56, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    •   Comment Sorry Rhododendrites, I guess I have to explain the compostion. The obscuring elements, the pomegranates, are a part of the compositon. That's why they are also mentioned in the title. The crop is not meant to give an entire view of the abbey or of that special bulding, it's supposed to catch the atmosphere of the garden behind this amazing monastery with the pomegranate tree.. --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:26, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Fontfroide is a wonderful site, but people often photograph only the arcs of the beautiful cloister – so I am really happy to enjoy this inspired photo of the pomegranates before the garden façade, carefully framed. I like how you managed to include a hint to the abbey’s hilly situation. Gallery link refined: most monastery photos are on the special page for exteriors of religious buildings. --Aristeas (talk) 19:57, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Aristeas, I missed this, only found the interiors.--Palauenc05 (talk) 21:34, 7 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problem, sometimes it is hard to find the best link. But Cart, Basile, me and others care for the gallery links, too, so together we find the best solution. --Aristeas (talk) 10:27, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Sorry, several problems in my view : 1) the angle of view of this building is not spectacular, 2) the bush of the foreground is hiding the subject, I mean the composition doesn't work for me, and 3) the light is too average, almost dull, it was apparently midday and the colors are rather washed out -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:40, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The composition would work better with different light. --Thi (talk) 14:25, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Eastern grey kangaroo (Macropus giganteus) Mount Annan composite of 6.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 16 Jan 2024 at 10:26:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Support Informative. --Thi (talk) 14:27, 8 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak support Well done, the "weak" is due to the sharpness of the first 2 shots Poco a poco (talk) 11:26, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Timetable (day 5 after nomination) edit 

Wed 10 Jan → Mon 15 Jan
Thu 11 Jan → Tue 16 Jan
Fri 12 Jan → Wed 17 Jan
Sat 13 Jan → Thu 18 Jan
Sun 14 Jan → Fri 19 Jan
Mon 15 Jan → Sat 20 Jan

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting) edit 

Sat 06 Jan → Mon 15 Jan
Sun 07 Jan → Tue 16 Jan
Mon 08 Jan → Wed 17 Jan
Tue 09 Jan → Thu 18 Jan
Wed 10 Jan → Fri 19 Jan
Thu 11 Jan → Sat 20 Jan
Fri 12 Jan → Sun 21 Jan
Sat 13 Jan → Mon 22 Jan
Sun 14 Jan → Tue 23 Jan
Mon 15 Jan → Wed 24 Jan

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.

  1. 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)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
     (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. 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 ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. 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 the 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. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
    • 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.
  5. 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/January 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request edit

  1. 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)
  2. 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 ===
  3. 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/January 2024.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. 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).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
    3. 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.
  5. 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

  1. 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=--~~~~}}
  2. 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 ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. 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/January 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=804402179"