Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured candidates
📽️ Media
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, 2024, 2025 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal thingsNominatingGuidelines for nominatorsPlease read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documentsThere are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject. Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable. Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself. Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well. Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:
Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced." PhotographsOn the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audioPlease nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominationsIf a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:
Simple tutorial for new usersAdding a new nominationIf 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 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:
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: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for 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. VotingEditors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator. A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above. Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidatesOver time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:
This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:
If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box: In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:
After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose. Featured picture candidate policyGeneral rules
Featuring and delisting rulesA candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. 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 politePlease 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
|
Table of contents
Featured picture candidates
Voting period ends on 22 May 2025 at 16:24:58 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Painted ceilings
Info Ceiling of the Golden Hall representing the wisdom (Lat: Sapientia), with the motto "PAR ME Reges regnant" (my rule rule) .- City Hall Augsbourg. Created by Pierre André Leclercq - uploaded by Pierre André Leclercq - nominated by Pierre André Leclercq -- Pierre André
Support --Pierre André (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 22 May 2025 at 13:57:19 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family_:_Agaricaceae
Info created by Plozessor – uploaded by Plozessor – nominated by Plozessor -- Plozessor (talk) 13:57, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 22 May 2025 at 08:31:04 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Ramphastidae (Toucans and toucanet)
Info No FPs of this genus/toucanets. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent again Cmao20 (talk) 10:55, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20 --Harlock81 (talk) 13:00, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 22 May 2025 at 04:31:59 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info created by Plozessor – uploaded by Plozessor – nominated by Plozessor -- Plozessor (talk) 04:31, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 22 May 2025 at 04:27:37 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Dryopteridaceae
Info Beautiful unrolling leaf of a Dryopteris filix-mas . Focus stack of 13 photos.}}
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:27, 13 May 2025 (UTC)Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:27, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful indeed - looks like a fractal Cmao20 (talk) 10:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:57, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 21 May 2025 at 18:46:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Groups
Info created by Georges Seurat, uploaded and nominated by Yann
Support Notable painting with its own article, very high-resolution. -- Yann (talk) 18:46, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 19:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Thi (talk) 20:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support surprised this iconic painting is not already FP Cmao20 (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 23:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. I can’t avoid to think that a photo with a similar composition would fail miserably here: we would criticize the big foreground shadow which makes some of the most prominent people hardly recognizable, the many cropped people and things at the edges, etc. ;–) Yes, a painting is a painting and a photo is a photo, but maybe we can learn here something for the critique of photos, too: e.g. that a big foreground shadow is OK if it contributes to a successful, inspired and realistic general impression. – Aristeas (talk) 10:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:08, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 21 May 2025 at 18:31:06 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Photo techniques/Black and White#Portraits
Info Algerian women wearing traditional Berber clothing. Created by Samia Dib Benkaci – nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 18:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 18:37, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice portrait. --Yann (talk) 18:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment I've fixed the gallery for you, all B&W photos have their own page. Also you made quite the mess of the nomination code by renaming the file during the nom. You should never do that. I'll fix it for you, but please don't do so again. --Cart (talk) 18:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Lovely Cmao20 (talk) 22:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Good composition, expressive eyes, rich textures. A compelling and intimate portrait. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:58, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Radomianin. – Aristeas (talk) 07:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:58, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 21 May 2025 at 16:20:26 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes/Tyrannidae#Genus_:_Contopus
Info Eastern wood-pewee (Contopus virens). all by — Rhododendrites talk | 16:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 16:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice composition, with the bokeh and the gentle arch of the branch Cmao20 (talk) 22:51, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:59, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 07:30, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 21 May 2025 at 12:40:26 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Salicaceae
Info Autumn-red aspen leaves (Populus tremula) in contre-jour by Myrstigen track, Brastad, Sweden. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 12:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cart (talk) 12:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support This one's all about the light Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20, and the harmonic autumn colours are also important. I don’t know about Sweden, but here in Germany you have to search for a while to find a Populus tremula with such colourful leaves; it depends on the autumn weather and on the particular location. If it is about the same in Sweden, you have found a particularly beautiful one! – Aristeas (talk) 15:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- It's the same here, usually they just turn yellow. The ones shielded in forests can turn these colors. --Cart (talk) 15:38, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 18:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent light, vivid colors, strong focus - a striking and well-composed autumn image. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 21 May 2025 at 09:09:10 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Semnornithidae (Toucan barbets and Prong-billed barbets)
Info No FPs of this small bird family. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:09, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:09, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:36, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 10:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Lovely Cmao20 (talk) 13:24, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support You should fix the file name, there is a typo, it should be "Paz de las Aves". Poco a poco (talk) 13:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- So it is. An amazingly friendly family-run place. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Charlesjsharp, I see that you are having some trouble fixing the name of the file. Do you want me to rename it according to Poco's advice and fix the code so your nomination stays intact? I think you remember the bother you've run into before when moving files during a nom. (In case you are wondering: You didn't complete the correction with your move. It's "de" not "le", but I don't want to move the file without your permission.) --Cart (talk) 18:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Please. I've been renaming lots of files and clearly made a mess! Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:32, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- No problem, I'll fix it for you. Renaming a nom is a little different than renaming normal files. --Cart (talk) 20:40, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Please. I've been renaming lots of files and clearly made a mess! Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:32, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Charlesjsharp, I see that you are having some trouble fixing the name of the file. Do you want me to rename it according to Poco's advice and fix the code so your nomination stays intact? I think you remember the bother you've run into before when moving files during a nom. (In case you are wondering: You didn't complete the correction with your move. It's "de" not "le", but I don't want to move the file without your permission.) --Cart (talk) 18:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support – Aristeas (talk) 15:11, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Mile (talk) 18:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful bird. --Yann (talk) 18:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:08, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support as per Yann, the colors are simply great. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:49, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:19, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 08:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 21 May 2025 at 09:15:25 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Boidae (Boas)
Info Unusually, the boa constrictor is known by its scientific name. No FPs of this species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:15, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose It's a great knot of snake and I like how the head is positioned, but the background light is too glary for me, sorry. (or, you can use the dull glare and make it into a brilliant light instead.) --Cart (talk) 10:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support FP to me because of the composition and high quality, but I do prefer Cart's edit. Cmao20 (talk) 13:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 21 May 2025 at 01:35:38 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#United_States
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg -- Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:35, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Great composition and original subject -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support as per Basile; Special mood. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Moheen (keep talking) 09:57, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Absolutely excellent Cmao20 (talk) 13:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 14:04, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Basile and Radomianin. – Aristeas (talk) 15:07, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:10, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 08:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:43, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 May 2025 at 22:32:50
Info Now superseded by the 108 gigapixel File:Girl with a Pearl Earring - Hirox.jpg (Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg)
Delist . The proposed replacement (a tile set at full-res) is the highest resolution image on Commons, AFAIK. The current image is about the size of one of the individual tiles. See Template:Tile set/Girl with a Pearl Earring - Hirox/grid -- JayCubby (talk) 22:32, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep I appreciate that Commons has always sought to host media in the highest resolution available, in order to provide maximum flexibility for reusers who might want to use our pictures for large prints or high-resolution displays. But I think there does come a point where this gets faintly ridiculous. Does anyone really need a 108,000 megapixel version of Girl with a Pearl Earring, showing details at a far, far finer level than the painter's original brushstrokes? What is that extra information useful for? By delisting the current one and replacing it with these tiles, we're saying that it isn't enough to have a 179 megapixel image (which is still extremely large and frankly already pretty absurd, but which can still be displayed as one file and which the average high-end computer has a decent chance of being able to display at full size). No, we need a 108,000 megapixel one, even though it can only be stored as a series of tiles (which are, even individually, impossible for most computers to display at full size) and thus has considerably less utility to end users than the current FP. Why exactly? Will we delist the 108,000 megapixel tiles when someone scans this painting at 200,000 megapixels? Where does this end? Isn't it just enough to have a good version of a painting at a sensible size that people might actually want to use? Why do I want to view a beautiful artwork at 500 times the magnification the artist intended, what worthwhile experience am I getting from this? Cmao20 (talk) 00:31, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Cmao20,
- What is that extra information useful for?
- Why not? We host TIFF files which are ten times larger than JPEGs with little quality difference.
- and which the average high-end computer has a decent chance of being able to display at full size
- There's a much lower-resolution version, stitched from the 108 GP, at File:Girl with a Pearl Earring - Hirox.jpg, at 18,920 × 22,112 px. I forgot to mention that. I'll see if I can open it on my midrange computer.
- Will we delist the 108,000 megapixel tiles when someone scans this painting at 200,000 megapixels?
- Maybe. Would we delist a 5MP in favor of a 50MP scan? Probably. Why shouldn't the trend continue?
- Why do I want to view a beautiful artwork at 500 times the magnification the artist intended, what worthwhile experience am I getting from this?
- What is that extra information useful for?
- You don't have to zoom down to the micron-level. But at a high resolution, the brushstrokes can be analyzed, etc.
- Also, the proposed replacement image's colors seem more natural to me. JayCubby (talk) 01:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Cmao20,
- In my opinion just because the trend can continue doesn't mean that it should. Perhaps there is someone who can benefit from analyzing brushstrokes in extremely high detail but it is not likely to be the vast majority of users. I believe we should feature the version of a picture that is most useful to the widest number of people. Commons may choose to host these high-resolution 'tiles' if we think a niche interest wants to use them, but I don't see why the tiles should be the version we feature, there's no reason why 'more is better'. Cmao20 (talk) 02:05, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Cmao20, that's a fair point. ZoomViewer has no issue with the half-gigabyte image. In your mind, which of the two versions has more accurate lighting and coloration? File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg or File:Girl with a Pearl Earring - Hirox.jpg? JayCubby (talk) 04:42, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- In my opinion just because the trend can continue doesn't mean that it should. Perhaps there is someone who can benefit from analyzing brushstrokes in extremely high detail but it is not likely to be the vast majority of users. I believe we should feature the version of a picture that is most useful to the widest number of people. Commons may choose to host these high-resolution 'tiles' if we think a niche interest wants to use them, but I don't see why the tiles should be the version we feature, there's no reason why 'more is better'. Cmao20 (talk) 02:05, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep per Cmao20, and thank you for taking this issue with too big files head on. The monstrous file is good to have in the Commons archive for whenever someone feels the need for a CSI investigation of Vermeer's household lint embedded in the paint. However, for normal use on sites with the broadband speed we have today, the present FP is more than enough. I think that the file that is FP, should not only be the best but also the most useful version for wikis etc. Also I just wonder: "Now superseded by"? I don't see the {{Superseded}} or {{Supersedes}} anywhere. --Cart (talk) 12:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Again, File:Girl with a Pearl Earring - Hirox.jpg is roughly 2.5x the resolution of File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg, and the lighting is more natural (and therefore more useful?) (File:1665 Girl with a Pearl Earring.jpg is overexposed, which reduces its detail). File:Girl with a Pearl Earring - Hirox.jpg isn't a tile set, but the tile set is linked in the file description.
- I didn't tag with {{superseded}} or {{duplicate}} because it's a FP, and the proposed replacement has a different brightness. JayCubby (talk) 13:47, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep per Cart and Cmao20. Also replacement seems too dark compared to this version. Yann (talk) 14:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep per @Cmao20 and @Cart. In addition, I too find the colors are better on this version. -- ERcheck (talk) 22:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Keep. Images should be useful, but 50 GB is too large. It took a long time to upload it, and it will take a long time to download. The file page can always point to a higher res version. Glrx (talk) 16:14, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 May 2025 at 22:01:32 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#India
Info created, uploaded and nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:01, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:01, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak support Nice landscape, I love the splashes of colour provided by the houses amidst the snow and the mountains. Not sure the image quality is FP though, there's not a lot of detail at full size. I added a couple of categories, btw. Cmao20 (talk) 00:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sangla is a really beautiful place, and I loved the previous one from it, but here the detail that was just enough in that, doesn't catch up in this. It's also taking in too much and therefore letting the wow-factor slip away. Look at what would happen if you had used just a portion of the image, see note. --Cart (talk) 11:09, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review, (and also re:Cmao20 above) unfortunately I can't do much about the detail--of all the pictures I took that morning, this shows the largest portion of the town of Sangla, but was taken from some distance and slight elevation from the actual town. I'm unable to see your note for some reason, but if it's regarding a crop, the original had more orchards at the bottom, under shadow like the bottom right, which I thought best to crop without having to crop out the building in the bottom left corner. Then also cropped some sky at the top because a panorama made sense to me at that instance. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- It's strange that the note keeps disappearing, I've tried to add it twice. Hmm ... Anyway, it was not for a crop, the detail is not good enough for that, only generally indicating the top left part that I think would have been better to focus on. The oppose for this lovely place pains me, but the quality just isn't there, sorry. --Cart (talk) 01:02, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the review, (and also re:Cmao20 above) unfortunately I can't do much about the detail--of all the pictures I took that morning, this shows the largest portion of the town of Sangla, but was taken from some distance and slight elevation from the actual town. I'm unable to see your note for some reason, but if it's regarding a crop, the original had more orchards at the bottom, under shadow like the bottom right, which I thought best to crop without having to crop out the building in the bottom left corner. Then also cropped some sky at the top because a panorama made sense to me at that instance. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:28, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 May 2025 at 21:57:57 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Tettigoniidae_(Katydids_or_Bush_Crickets)
Info Great green bush-cricket on a red engine bonnet. Created, uploaded and nominated by ThoBel-0043 -- ThoBel-0043 (talk) 21:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- ThoBel-0043 (talk) 21:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 May 2025 at 20:40:47 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
Info View of the Chiemgau Alps during sunrise from the top of the Hochries mountain (1,569 metres (5,148 ft)), Bavaria, Germany. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 23:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support I saw these in your recent uploads and was sure you were about to nominate one. I think this is the best one. I don't think the image quality is perfect - the original upload was a bit noisier than I'd have expected even for ISO 800 - but the final version is much better, and it is 38 megapixels so I don't want to be too picky. Stunning mood and composition. Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice mood and appealing composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Radomianin (talk) 05:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 10:28, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 11:12, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 04:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 08:42, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 May 2025 at 20:24:36 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae
Info Blossom of an ornamental leek with water droplets. Focus stack of 6 shots. Photographed in a garden in Bamberg. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:24, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:24, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Brilliant capture with perfect sharpness, balanced bokeh, and detailed droplets. Aesthetically and technically outstanding. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:01, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Wonderful image. The complementary colors of the pink and green work well, with the soft background adding a nice juxtaposition, but not distracting from the subject. The details of the flower and the dew steal the show! --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 21:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 21:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 23:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support As usual, very well done Cmao20 (talk) 00:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Crispy sharp. Impressive level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Stunning photo, perfectly executed focus stack. JayCubby (talk) 05:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Radomianin and Needsmoreritalin. – Aristeas (talk) 10:27, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:24, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 May 2025 at 19:54:18 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#North Macedonia
Info created by Деан Лазаревски – uploaded by Деан Лазаревски – nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:54, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Please Kiril, I don't know how many times I've had to add basic categories, descriptions and full gallery info to your nominations. You are a senior participant here at FPC, so more is expected of you. When you create a nomination, please check that all the things mentioned in the FPC rules are met. Thank you, --Cart (talk) 20:17, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry. Nice composition and framing, but I can see a lot of noise and not great sharpness. I don't think it's special enough to promote given the flaws Cmao20 (talk) 00:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, I don't see an elephant nor anything special -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 May 2025 at 00:43:47 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports
Info motor sport, DTM Classic, Norisring Nürnberg 2024: Stefan Mücke / Peter Mücke (Mercedes-Benz C-Klasse DTM); panning shot;
no sharp bird, no perfectly illuminated landscape, but an action shot with (at least for me) a wow effect;
created, uploaded and nominated by SteproSupport -- Stepro (talk) 00:43, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Info Vorne etwas mehr Raum und ich stimme dafür. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:59, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:54, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 23:45:24 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air_transport#Helicopters
Info created by Airwolfhound on Flickr – uploaded by Helmy oved – nominated by JayCubby -- JayCubby (talk) 23:45, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support as nom. I see no major flaws with the image. The detail is crisp, the motion blur is nice, and the resolution is decent enough. The hair of CA is my only criticism. -- JayCubby (talk) 23:45, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose This photo would be perfect for me if the rotors were shown in full. In this cut unfortunately not, sorry. --Stepro (talk) 00:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Stepro, it appears rather hard to keep the composition nice when the rotors are in frame. See File:Chinook - RIAT 2016 (28245423846).jpg JayCubby (talk) 01:34, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose FPs need a bit more than just "no major flaws", they also need good composition and that elusive "wow"-factor. While this is a good photo technically, it lacks really good composition, it is either too closely cropped or not close enough to highlight a section of the heli in a pleasing way, the light is dull and buildings in the background interfere with the main subject. --Cart (talk) 13:33, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak support I enjoy how it's zoomed in enough so you can see the disturbed air behind it, the rivets, and the guy leaning out the window. it's a striking juxtaposition, seeing him standing right under the rotor blades, tilted in midair, with only inches of metal under his feet. The tilted composition adds drama. I only wish there wasn't a building in the background. Henrysz (talk) 17:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I really wanted to like this image. It is a cool shot, but aside from the cropping of the rotors brought up by other reviewers, it suffers from some problems related to the shutter speed of 1/100 and f/10 respectively. There is an influence of diffraction in the image. I saw someone refer to CA, but I think its diffraction, personally. The image would have been sharper if shot at a faster shutter too. Tracking the subject, which is large, at a focal length of nearly 300, with a small aperture and low shutter speed, yielded an unsettling feeling to the image when viewed at 100%.
Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 23:09:31 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Family : Araneidae (Orb-weaver Spiders)
Info High quality focus stack with a good composition. Features both the female and the much smaller male of the species in one frame. created by Charlesjsharp – uploaded by Charlesjsharp – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:09, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:09, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 08:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Thank you for the nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:58, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Yikes! --Cart (talk) 13:35, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Perfect - Riad Salih (talk) 17:38, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:51, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support excellent! --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support High level of detail, excellent focus, technically well done -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:23, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support I read the female often eats the male after copulation. Here we can very well see how it is possible. --Yann (talk) 13:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, sometimes she does, but I believe not that often... Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:22, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 13:59, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 16:26, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:38, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:21, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- Did you all notice the two tiny spiderlings on the web? Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:44, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- @Charlesjsharp: haha yes I did! And also the flies stuck in the web. Looking a second time, I think there's even a second male spider on the left, but blurred/out of focus. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:55, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 09:52:19 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Columbidae_(Pigeons_and_Doves)
Info created by Stephan Sprinz – uploaded by Stephan Sprinz – nominated by Stephan Sprinz -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 09:52, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 09:52, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support - The hypnotic eye and soft colors are engaging. - ERcheck (talk) 14:42, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Simple but effective --Stepro (talk) 15:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Simple, good detail and elegant, but I could do without the disturbing white fluff at the top and focus on the bird. In my view, it's fencing it in. --Cart (talk) 15:28, 10 May 2025 (UTC)Neutral
- Change to
Oppose this version in favor of the crop. --Cart (talk) 20:48, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Change to
Weak support A bit of a shame that the tail is out of focus for such a common bird, but very nice composition Cmao20 (talk) 20:08, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent composition and beautiful background for me. – Aristeas (talk) 08:36, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 08:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- The background colors complement the mostly gray pigeon. The background is soft and makes the feather details pop in contrast. I saw a crop suggestion, and I think the top of the picture presents a slightly distracting element, but I do like the breathing room in front of the bird. It makes you wonder what it is thinking. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 19:19, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Alternative
Info Cropped version excluding the (possibly distracting) sky in the background as suggested by Cart and A.Savin but keeping a little bit more space in front of the bird compared to the original crop suggestion. (Also pinging previous voters ERcheck, Stepro, Cmao20, Bijay Chaurasia,Needsmoreritalin)
Support --Moheen (keep talking) 10:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Funny enough I actually like the background of the original version, but the cropped version is good, too. – Aristeas (talk) 10:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Definitely better. -- -donald- (talk) 11:01, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per my comment above. --Cart (talk) 11:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Btw, your 'ping' didn't work since you didn't sign the same edit where you mentioned all the previous voters. It's not enough just to mention people, the system needs your signature too to send the ping. --Cart (talk) 20:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- Ahh, thanks, forgot about that --Stephan Sprinz (talk) 06:15, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- Btw, your 'ping' didn't work since you didn't sign the same edit where you mentioned all the previous voters. It's not enough just to mention people, the system needs your signature too to send the ping. --Cart (talk) 20:52, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:21, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support This version is better. --Yann (talk) 13:50, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice. I support this over the original image. I do like that you added the extra "breathing" room. ERcheck - 21:55, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support I found this crop better when Cart originally suggested it, thanks for providing this alternative. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:41, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 04:25:55 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Fagales#Family : Betulaceae
Info Dead trunk of a Birch (Betula) in decomposition. The years of decomposition process have transformed this birch trunk into a natural work of art.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:25, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Definitely an interesting motif. Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:25, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak support Great motif. I’d just wish for a little bit more space (less tight crop) at the top and bottom. – Aristeas (talk) 08:46, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment and vote. A weak excuse, the tripod was at its highest position.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:21, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Unfortunately the crop is too tight at the top to be considered as an excellent image -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I've to agree Poco a poco (talk) 14:02, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak support per Aristeas. I actually find the zoomed in version with no grass even better (artistically, but not educationally). --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:46, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose This is surely very valuable, but the top down perspective, composition, flat lighting, grass in the background stealing attention, gives a mundane feel Henrysz (talk) 17:07, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 01:33:54 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images#Asia
Info Picture of the northern Indian subcontinent taken from the International Space Station, showing the region between Agra in the east and Kabul in the west. Created by astronauts on the International Space Station, uploaded by Ras67 – nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 01:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support After spending a tense night with drone & missile attacks, and jets flying overhead here in northern India (since India and Pakistan are on the cusp of war), I'm reminded by this picture of how artificial this border that has consumed millions of lives really is. -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 01:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment Impressive, but very noisy. I am unsure this counts as one of our best pictures of Earth from space when there is so much competition nowadays. Cmao20 (talk) 20:07, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- I understand, Cmao20. It indeed is quite noisy, but we do have this FP which is similarly noisy. I can see the noise being a reason to oppose, but for me the numerous village, town, and city lights peeking through winter fog of the densely populated Indo-Gangetic plain, interrupted by the thinly populated Himalayas, Hindu Kush and Tibetan Plateau in the north and Thar desert in the bottom left corner, and the continuity of the landscape make it quite beautiful. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:00, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support despite the noise caused from ISO 10.000 --Ras67 (talk) 20:22, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Moral support for the very honourable reasons to nominate this photo, but mostly because of the good composition. Unlike some other pictures of Earth from space it gives me an imposing impression of the spherical nature of Earth, the lights of the big cities are placed in a harmonic way, and the green arc over the far horizon adds some “space feeling”. This and the very difficult circumstances (a night shot from space, ISO 10.000 despite ƒ/1.4) excuse the noise for me. – Aristeas (talk) 08:25, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Good arguments Cmao20 (talk) 12:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support After having looked through the 1,507 photos from space of this region: Yes, this one is the best despite the high ISO. It has both good compo and the wow-factor, and it shows the region in a very illustrative way. --Cart (talk) 13:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support as per Aristeas and Cart. Special thanks to Cart for her extensive research and support. Your efforts in reviewing the extensive collection of photographs of the region were invaluable. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:50, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- I would also add that sometimes night photos reveal more about human activity than those taken in daylight, even though there are plenty of hints that photos for wikis should be taken in daylight. Here the borderline is clearly visible, and then there are also photos like this one where all the oil rigs in the Atlantic are clearly visible. They and other structures at sea don't show up on sites like Google maps, since they only service land and coastal regions. So for most people they don't exist, as in "out of sight, out of mind". --Cart (talk) 15:37, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, Cart. Your words, as always, add depth and perspective. I really appreciate how you so often see what lies between the lines, and bring it to light, both in your images and in the way you speak about them. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:20, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 18:53, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 May 2025 at 01:23:03 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports
Info motor sport, DTM, Norisring Nürnberg 2024: Award Ceremony; Nicki Thiim (DEN, Lamborghini, SSR Performance); celebration, Champagne shower;
created, uploaded and nominated by SteproSupport -- Stepro (talk) 01:23, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry but while I love the composition, it seems very unsharp to me Cmao20 (talk) 20:06, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- I don't know what exactly you expect. "Freezing" the champagne splashes with a very short exposure time would ruin the emotionality of the photo just as much as focusing on the person behind it. The motion blur of the champagne splashes is what makes the photo in my opinion. Stepro (talk) 21:39, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Of course I don't want you to freeze them with a short exposure time. That would ruin the photo. I just mean that the image is not sharp. There is no fine detail, either on the droplets or on the man in the background. It's like everything is out of focus. Cmao20 (talk) 00:38, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but I'm with Cmao20 on this. It's great that the champagne splash is not "frozen" that brings life to the photo, but I'd like the guy to be sharper, like you managed to do in this photo. I'd choose that photo over this. Apart from that, the file name is not describing what's in the photo. We are always telling new users to follow the Commons naming policy, we "oldies" should do that too. --Cart (talk) 00:02, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- When I look at the vast quality difference between the picture you link (which is excellent and I'd vote for as FP (Edit: amusingly it appears I opposed this picture in 2019. I've changed my mind, it should have become FP)) and this one, I almost wonder if Stepro even uploaded the right file here. This picture is poor quality and looks almost upsampled. Cmao20 (talk) 00:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- I have at least nominated the photo that I intended to nominate. ;-) For me personally, it's one of my photos from last year that conveys real emotion. Of course, I could also nominate other super-sharp photos, but they wouldn't have that wow effect that was at least once demanded here. (On the grounds that FP is not QI.) The other photo mentioned is less emotional for me, that's how different perspectives can be. In my opinion, the big difference in terms of sharpness is not that it is present there and missing here, but that in the other photo the people are not standing behind the champagne shower and are therefore naturally in focus. In this picture, the focus is clearly on the champagne splashes, but they have a motion blur. As the name suggests - a blur. One that I wanted. Stepro (talk) 00:56, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Well, as I say I think the composition of this picture is very good, but I don't know why you think I have a problem with the motion blur. The motion blur is absolutely necessary for the picture to work. It conveys a dynamic impression. But the focus isn't 'clearly on the champagne splashes'. I don't think the focus is anywhere. Nothing in this picture is really sharp, and I don't mean this in the sense that the subject is blurry, I mean that the subject is badly focussed and the image has no detail. Cmao20 (talk) 12:47, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- When I look at the vast quality difference between the picture you link (which is excellent and I'd vote for as FP (Edit: amusingly it appears I opposed this picture in 2019. I've changed my mind, it should have become FP)) and this one, I almost wonder if Stepro even uploaded the right file here. This picture is poor quality and looks almost upsampled. Cmao20 (talk) 00:40, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but I can just second Cmao20’s comment. Somehow this photo looks like a smartphone shot – no fine details. Even falling splashes of liquids can look more detailed (e.g.). In addition, I also cannot find any “wow” in the subject of this photo: it just shows a perverted waste of luxury foods. Using champagne as a fun shower is tasteless and stupid, it’s typical of the hollowness of our affluent society, which doesn’t know how to express pleasure other than through senseless exaggeration and waste. Yes, you can call this an odd comment, but everyone can make an odd comment from time to time, and at least this is a honest one and not a revenge vote. ;–) – Aristeas (talk) 08:11, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 21:06:47 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes
Info Warbling vireo (Vireo gilvus) singing. Surprised that we seem to have no FPs of any species in the vireo family. Took me a long time to get a good shot of this one -- maybe I'll put some additional effort into the others. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 21:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 21:06, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Stepro (talk) 01:09, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment The bird is great, but the bokeh branch above it looks like it's about to whack the poor guy. Any chance of making it less conspicuous? --Cart (talk) 21:30, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- True. Thanks, W.carter.
new version uploaded. — Rhododendrites talk | 02:19, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
- True. Thanks, W.carter.
Support Thanks, now the bird looks like it sings out of joy and not sounding an alarm. ;) --Cart (talk) 11:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment No luck here, fuzzy. Would expect sharper, despite 600mm. But i saw texture is new, good for you. --Mile (talk) 09:13, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 20:44:42 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family : Labridae (Wrasses)
Info Wounded wrasse (Halichoeres chierchiae), La Paz, Baja California, Mexico. Note: we have no FPs of genus Halichoeres chierchiae and I uploaded in fact the first images of this species to Commons. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:44, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful fish despite the wound, and its shadow gives the image depth. --Cart (talk) 22:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:34, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cart. – Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:16, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Is the dark spot natural? --Yann (talk) 17:01, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
- That's the reason for its common name Poco a poco (talk) 19:09, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 15:26:29 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info created by Llez – uploaded by Llez – nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Llez (talk) 15:26, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:32, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful panorama Cmao20 (talk) 20:05, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Very nice and interesting panorama. Thank you for the image notes with the names of the villages etc. They will be forgotten when this nomination is over, hence it would be great if you could add the same notes to the description page of your photo, too. – Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Done Thanks for the hint --Llez (talk) 08:52, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! – Aristeas (talk) 10:25, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:14, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 08:40, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 12:11:37 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Germany
Info Something a little different. A study of industrial grandeur in the machine hall of a former 'model mine' on the outskirts of Dortmund. created by GZagatta – uploaded by GZagatta – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:11, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:39, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:31, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:49, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Olivier LPB (talk) 17:17, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per nomination. – Aristeas (talk) 18:34, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Nicely composed scene with pleasant sense of symmetry, soft light, and a touch of nostalgic industrial charm. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:58, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:45, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:32, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 08:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Argenberg (talk) 09:39, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Moheen (keep talking) 10:03, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per Radomianin -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 May 2025 at 08:07:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Germany
Info created and uploaded Field and Mühlenbach on the border between Börnste (Kirchspiel) and Merfeld, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany nominated by XRay -- XRay 💬 08:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- XRay 💬 08:07, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:25, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support - Finally. There was something about this photo that bugged me, but I couldn't figure out what. But since it's an aerial photo, you can turn it whichever way you want and I started fiddling with it. I find it more pleasing if it's turned 90 deg counter clock, so that the stream is along the right side of the image. That way the tractor tracks don't curve upwards in that "Inception way" (it gives me vertigo!). But since that is up to the individual viewer, I guess it doesn't matter. ;-) --Cart (talk) 22:03, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- I was thinking something similar. Its a very cool optical illusion. It looks like the dark green grass in the foreground is flat and then the cut grass curves upwards like a wall. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:23, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Your image so perfectly captures the scene that I started sneezing and had to take a benadryl. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:24, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:48, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:06, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:31, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 08:57, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 21:52:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Maps#Maps of Asia
Info created by Survey of India / Walker, J. & C., uploaded and nominated by Yann
Info Old map of Indian Himalaya. Scale 1:253,440. 1894. The source file has some issue, so I needed to crop it.
Support Very high resolution. Actually it is difficult to find recent map of the Indian Himalaya at this scale. -- Yann (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support A valuable image, and very high resolution. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:53, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Very nice Cmao20 (talk) 11:20, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:38, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support A masterpiece of surveying and cartography. Do I understand correctly that sheet 66 has four parts (NW, NE, SW, SE) and that they have been glued together in order to have the whole sheet at once? Or are these four different sheets? In any case, the borders of the NW part do not align well with the borders of the adjacent parts, maybe they come from another edition; but the map itself is aligned very well, and that’s more important. – Aristeas (talk) 18:02, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, you are right. Map sheets are usually divided in several parts. I don't know the reason why the borders do not align. It is not mentioned at the source. Yann (talk) 18:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you! Well, as I said above, most of the actual map is aligned very well at the borders of the parts, so it does not hurt that the margins are not perfectly aligned. – Aristeas (talk) 19:52, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:30, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:46, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:30, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 21:19:22 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Sweden
Info Dense vegetation on the shore of Brofjorden at Lahälla, Lysekil Municipality, Sweden. In some places the hiking path goes through little tunnels of greenery, like this patch of birches (Betula pendula). The trail is part of Kuststigen hiking trail. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 21:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cart (talk) 21:19, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 07:41, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice mood --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:48, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice light and good leading lines Cmao20 (talk) 11:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Peaceful, inviting. I feel like I've been there. - ERcheck (talk) 14:19, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautifully composed with effective rule of thirds; the path leads the eye naturally. Lovely light and framing birch trees create a calm, inviting scene. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:12, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support This kind of photos looks simple, but I have tried to take similar images and almost always failed – something was wrong, was missing, etc. I think I have mentioned this (or a related photo) as example for you talent to find the representative detail and frame it perfectly. – Aristeas (talk) 17:56, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Lovely image. Well composed and exposed. You can see the trail is popular too! --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 18:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:46, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 15:33, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:29, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
File:Macaca sylvanus in Michlifen 01.jpg, not featured
Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 20:31:53 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals/Primates#Genus : Macaca (Macaques)
Info created by Mounir Neddi – uploaded by Mounir Neddi – nominated by Mounir Neddi -- Mounir Neddi (talk) 20:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir Neddi (talk) 20:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose -- I am sorry, but the image has contrast, lighting, clarity and composition issues that don't meet the standards for Featured Pictures. --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 23:04, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Nice capture but sorry, the angle, the strong shadows, and the image quality, are not sufficient for FP Cmao20 (talk) 11:17, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Mergansers
Voting period ends on 17 May 2025 at 03:13:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
-
A hen Red-breasted Merganser in flight in the Barnegat Inlet.
-
A drake Red-breasted Merganser in the Barnegat Inlet.
-
A juvenile drake, Red-breasted Merganser in the Barnegat Inlet.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Mergus
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Needmoreritalin (I hope I did this right)-- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 03:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support There are no Mergansers in the Featured Picture Galleries, so I am submitting a set. -- Needsmoreritalin (talk) 03:13, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Just talk about how to re-name files
|
---|
|
Support So with the paperwork in good order, I think it's time for me to support this little punk rock family. --Cart (talk) 22:42, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Since the issue has been fixed, perhaps the big wall of text above can be added to a collapsable box, Cart? --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:47, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- Excellent suggestion UnpetitproleX. Done. --Cart (talk) 10:51, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support These are very nice, well done Cmao20 (talk) 11:16, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I don't understand what kind of set this one is. The closest is probably #4 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). I'd accept a set of 2: in flight + swimming or a set of 2: adult and juvenile, but this fulfil no valid set IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 17:18, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- Poco a poco, we have been bending the rather short-sighted and rigid rules of sets before. I have no problem with allowing this. And technically speaking, Needsmoreritalin only has this nom of three photos up and running, so given your definition of sets, he could withdraw this and nominate the drake adult and juvenile as one set, and then nominate the hen in a normal separate nom (or any other combination that would fit the set criteria you outline more perfectly). The three photos are great, so I think the outcome would be the same as if we allow this nomination to proceed. To placiate you, perhaps Needsmoreritalin could refrain from making another nomination until this one is over? It's easier to keep this one running instead of going through all that bureaucratic rigmarole. In another current set nomination, Adam is admitting to finding more images for his "complete set of illustrations" saying there might be need for a second set, and no one is getting upset about that. --Cart (talk) 18:04, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- I will not nominate any additional images for Featured Picture consideration until this set is approved or rejected. This was the first time I submitted a set and I appreciate your feedback. Thanks Cart for the support and the suggestion!
- I submitted this as a set because the drake Red-breasted Merganser is very unique in its appearance, the hen and immature Red-Breasted Mergansers look the same. However, when the juvenile male gets a little older it starts wearing eyeliner. There are no Featured Pictures of any species in the genus, Mergus. I thought submitting the three "types" of Mergus Serrator would be a good start.
- This is only my rationale, and you must support or oppose based on your own standards. I respect and accept your decision. Needsmoreritalin (talk) 22:21, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
- Sets are always tricky since they rely so much on interpreting the rules, and if one photo isn't good the whole thing falls. I've made a couple of sets early on here at FPC, but I have since given up on them, and I prefer to make noms one at a time just to keep things simple. Slow and steady wins in the long run. --Cart (talk) 22:28, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good photos. Regarding the set question, I just think of this one as “Mergansers family”: mother, father, child ;–). But if this argument is too lax and risqué (the two adults are probably not the parents of that juvenile, although I could not tell the difference ;–)), I second Cart’s pragmatic argumentation. – Aristeas (talk) 18:09, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:26, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Would support 1st,2nd, but 3rd not so much. This should go one by one, since 3 differnt birds. --Mile (talk) 18:29, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 18:51:11 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Black and White#Objects
Info High contrast black and white image of a historic DC3 (SE-CFP) at Skå airfield, Stockholm County. The captain oversees maintenance work between flights. I chose black and white to draw attention to all the beautiful details in the aircraft and I think it suits this historic aircraft. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- ArildV (talk) 18:51, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 01:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support The people working on the plane is what makes it special Cmao20 (talk) 02:53, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 05:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:09, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 18:45, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Color photography feels weird when antiques are being displayed in the modern era. JayCubby (talk) 05:18, 12 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 May 2025 at 05:30:34 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Electronics
Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 05:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 05:30, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment Interesting motif, but imo the composition will look more balanced with the phone box a bit centered. Slight more crop on the left. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 06:04, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Done I've uploaded a cropped version.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 07:05, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 01:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 05:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support thanks, I wish for a bit more space on the right but this slight off-center also works nicely. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:51, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 04:28, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Villy Fink Isaksen (talk) 07:43, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak support Good juxtaposition of old and new, intact and broken. The light could be more interesting (hence “weak”), but it works. – Aristeas (talk) 14:18, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 14:26, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:29, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Support дали работи --Mile (talk) 18:20, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- Не проверив. 😄 --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 18:47, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Limited wow effect for me, also I don't like the almost overexposed upper-left corner. Categories could be better (that does not change anything on other flaws, though) --A.Savin 21:59, 10 May 2025 (UTC)
- @A.Savin: This is the maximum one can get, and it depicts the actual view very well. A clear sky would have resulted in a large shadow over the main object. One sneaky way to deal with the sky in the upper-left corner is exposure bracketing. What else do you suggest?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:20, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- As I don't know the place, I have no suggestion for the place either. But a phone booth is not running away and in general there are lots of ways and time to capture it. --A.Savin 18:04, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
- @A.Savin: This is the maximum one can get, and it depicts the actual view very well. A clear sky would have resulted in a large shadow over the main object. One sneaky way to deal with the sky in the upper-left corner is exposure bracketing. What else do you suggest?--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:20, 11 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 May 2025 at 10:12:13 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#India
Info The juxtaposition of the flowering plants in the foreground with the stark white cathedral appeals to me. There are no FPs of church exteriors in India. Created by Tagooty – uploaded by Tagooty – nominated by Tagooty -- Tagooty (talk) 10:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 10:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Support I agree. This is a very nice composition. Cmao20 (talk) 11:11, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:20, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 05:19, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:32, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support per nomination – interesting juxtaposition, and the sky is very good, too. – Aristeas (talk) 16:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 01:38, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I'm sorry, but this POV doesn't work for me. An essential chunk of the church is not visible and there are disturbing elements in the compo. --Poco a poco (talk) 08:15, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I agree with poco.--Ermell (talk) 14:21, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Good weather but the composition with the cut out tree at the left and the pillars in the center doesn't work for me. Also the door is hidden -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 08:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:45, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Oppose - Per Poco and Basile Morin. The broken fence is a distraction. - ERcheck (talk) 22:23, 13 May 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 May 2025 at 09:55:29 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Phasianidae (Grouse, Partridges, Peafowl, Pheasants, Quail, Turkeys)
Info created by Rohit14400 – uploaded by Rohit14400 – nominated by Rohit14400 -- thewanderersthirdeye (talk) 09:55, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- thewanderersthirdeye (talk) 09:55, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Striking symmetry. --Tagooty (talk) 10:15, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Support light could have been better, but arguably better composed that both of the other two FPs. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:36, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
- And both the other two FPs have already appeared on the main page. So this is a timely upgrade, and a delist for the smaller of the two older ones might be in order. -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:44, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Weak support Beautiful and well composed but the image quality is no more than okay Cmao20 (talk) 11:10, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
Comment I agree with previous comments about the image's quality, but it's mostly color noise, normal noise, light and a tiny amount of sharpening, all very easy to fix. It's a beautiful photo, so thewanderersthirdeye, Tagooty, UnpetitproleX, Cmao20, if you want a version with these issues fix you got one here. Best, --Cart (talk) 11:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)
- @W.carter Thank you for fixing these issues. New version looks better to me. This is my first submission to the FP list. How should I proceed now? Should I withdraw the current nomination and submit a new one for the edited image? thewanderersthirdeye (talk) 13:55, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
- thewanderersthirdeye, I forgot to say welcome to FPC. :-) I didn't realize you were new here. The easiest thing is to add it as an 'Alternative' to this nom. Because it's a reviewed QI, we can't simply upload the improved version over the old file per COM:OVERWRITE, that is otherwise an option for small changes. No need to withdraw and begin again. I will fix this for you, you can just look at my edits here on the nomination and remember how this is done for future references. You can also support the new alternative if you like, support both or strike the support for the original, it's up to you. --Cart (talk) 14:21, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Alternative
Info Edited version with some of the issues corrected, see above. Also 'pinging' previous voters about this change: Tagooty, UnpetitproleX, Cmao20.
Support Beautiful bird. --Cart (talk) 14:24, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Thanks for the improvements. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 14:53, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 01:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Striking symmetry --Tagooty (talk) 03:31, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support thewanderersthirdeye (talk) 08:37, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:01, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:36, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
The Bottle Imp
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2025 at 21:06:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Printed#Book illustrations in black and white
Info created by William Hatherell – restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:06, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
Info This is the complete set of illustrations, from I think the second or third printing of the work with, notably, the caption for the second changed to be a more accurate line for what's seen compared to the first printing. Otherwise it's the same image. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:24, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:03, 4 May 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:27, 6 May 2025 (UTC)
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 01:39, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 19:33, 7 May 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 17:31, 8 May 2025 (UTC)
- Just noting that there may need to be a second set. Need to double check my book, but I moved recently. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:27, 9 May 2025 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)
Thu 08 May → Tue 13 May Fri 09 May → Wed 14 May Sat 10 May → Thu 15 May Sun 11 May → Fri 16 May Mon 12 May → Sat 17 May Tue 13 May → Sun 18 May
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Sun 04 May → Tue 13 May Mon 05 May → Wed 14 May Tue 06 May → Thu 15 May Wed 07 May → Fri 16 May Thu 08 May → Sat 17 May Fri 09 May → Sun 18 May Sat 10 May → Mon 19 May Sun 11 May → Tue 20 May Mon 12 May → Wed 21 May Tue 13 May → Thu 22 May
Closing a featured picture promotion request
The bot
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
Any experienced user may close requests.
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
featured or not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured === - Save your edit.
- If it is featured:
- Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
- Also add the picture to 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.
- 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/May 2025), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Closing a delisting request
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
'''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg) - Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
delisted or not delisted
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted === - Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/May 2025.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
- Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
- Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
- If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured === - Save your edit.
- Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/May 2025), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.