Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
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, 2024 and current month.

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

Formal things

Nominating

Guidelines for nominators

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

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

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

Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates.

Set nominations

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

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

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

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 (~~~~).

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.

General rules

  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 fewer than two support votes.
    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.) This does not apply to nominations containing at least one ‘Alternative’ image – because it is possible that another image can overtake the one in the lead during the last days, such nominations are never closed early.
    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

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.
  5. Only two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

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 polite

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

Table of contents

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

File:Aztec Sandstone - Valley of Fire1.jpg

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 02:11:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aztec Sandstone - Valley of Fire

File:Mount Spry and the East Temple.jpg

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2024 at 02:11:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mount Spry and the East Temple

File:Noctua fimbriata (caterpillar) focus stacking-20241118-RM-211015.jpg

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 23:06:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Caterpillar of the variegated banded owl (Noctua fimbriata) on a Muehlenbeckia

File:2011-05-29 046b Wikivoyage banner image of Your rainbow panorama - Aarhus, Denmark.jpg

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 20:10:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Your rainbow panorama installation by Ólafur Eliasson at the ARoS Aarhus Art Museum, Denmark.
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: per COM:FPC and COM:I: "Images should have at least 2 real megapixels of information"-- Basile Morin (talk) 22:59, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

File:Newport Beach Pier by Don Ramey Logan.tif

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 16:13:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Newport Beach Pier

File:1961 Cooper T53 Donington Park 2023 01.jpg

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 11:28:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

1961 Cooper T53 in a historic race at Donington Park in 2023.

File:Yoram Taharlev Portrait.jpg

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 09:11:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Two holes and green leaves on the bark of a tree trunk in the forest in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 05:38:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Two holes and green leaves on the bark of a tree trunk in the forest in Luang Prabang Laos

File:Sääse tiib.jpg

Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2024 at 03:13:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • Here < is also a "winning work" (first prize) that would be straight rejected at FPC per COM:I.
  • "Chromatic problems also come from our standard lenses and are usually easily fixable in post-treatment. I made a try on Lightroom with this picture and got spectacular improvement. The result is of course available on request.
  • These stacking issues are fixable in my opinion (like were the others similarly supposed to be "impossible"). The goal is to promote the best images, here, not all the interesting photos. It may take some time of extra work, only.
  • Possible also to start with COM:QIC (easier) before FPC.
  • Regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:08, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iglesia de San Juan, ciudad de Luxemburgo, Luxemburgo, 2023-12-16, DD 31-33 HDR.jpg

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 14:32:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Secretario (Sagittarius serpentarius), parque nacional de Amboseli, Kenia, 2024-05-23, DD 13.jpg

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 13:57:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Basílica del Sagrado Corazón, París, Francia, 2022-10-30, DD 33-35 HDR.jpg

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 13:56:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Basilica of the Sacred Heart, Paris, France

File:Albert Einstein sticks his tongue.jpg

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 12:17:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Albert Einstein sticks his tongue out for photographer Arthur Sasse after his 72nd birthday party on March 14, 1951

File:Lantern bug (Pyrops candelaria) Double Haven HK.jpg

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 10:43:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Family : Fulgoridae (Planthoppers, Lanternflies)

File:Saturday Evening Post 1943 Unpublished (Leyendecker).jpg

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 06:45:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Unpublished variation of J.C. Leyendecker's famous Saturday Evening Post New Year's Baby, intended for use in 1943.

File:Namdae stream water reflection of colorful clouds from Wolhwagyo bridge in Gangneung South Korea.jpg

Voting period ends on 10 Dec 2024 at 06:09:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Namdae stream water reflection of colorful clouds from Wolhwagyo bridge in Gangneung South Korea

File:2024-11-19-Central Park-0669.jpg

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 19:20:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View over The Lake (Central Park, New York City) to Building San Remo in autum 2024

File:Líderes indígenas.jpg

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 04:55:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chief Raoni Metuktire of the Kayapó people with an indigenous leader from other countries in Abya Ayalam (during the National Movement of Indigenous Peoples that takes place in the capital of Brazil).
  •  Support — Iwaqarhashmi (talk) 16:59, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Weak support Very expressive, strong image. I wonder a bit about the noticeable noise. I would not mind it at all if this was a photo taken under difficult circumstances at high ISO speed, but acc. to the Exif data this photo was taken at ISO speed rating 180 with a Nikon D3200, therefore I would expect a very low level of noise. Strange. – Aristeas (talk) 20:16, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I agree with Aristeas, in my opinion it looks like the noise has been artificially added. Sometimes photographers do this to either simulate "analog grain" or to mask blur/shake. I took the liberty of creating a denoised version: SwissTransfer link If you and the community are fine with the result, please feel free to use the file for an update. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 22:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Man and woman, I think. How do you guess these intentions by the author? I don't find them on the file page. These elements may be important. In the background but perhaps also on the subjects, with painting brushes. Without RAW we have no idea about how looks like the initial work -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:17, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for pointing that out. You're certainly right, it's probably a man. I just suspected, as I did, that the author wanted to black out something he thought was unimportant. But without a raw file, I can only guess, not know. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 07:31, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Understood. Thanks. In this case, I also regret that the resolution is only 3,016 × 2,121 pixels, about four times smaller than what the sensor of this camera is capable of. Probably downsized image, then, which is against COM:I -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:45, 3 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ramsau bei Berchtesgaden (DE), Milchstraße über Hochkalter & Hintersee -- 2024 -- 1018-50.jpg

Voting period ends on 9 Dec 2024 at 03:05:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Milky way over the Hochkalter Massif and Lake Hintersee in Ramsau bei Berchtesgaden, Bavaria, Germany
No, it's supposed to be natural :-) And please, assume good faith, it's your work. You should know (better than us) what you've done in the sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You brought it up, so I'm interested in what you consider being "artificial" in the sky. Is it about emphasising the structure of the Milky Way (high/low or white/black)? I don't understand, assuming good faith, what you're getting at. A. Öztas (talk) 04:37, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes. "Emphasising the structure". "High / low, white / black" -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Will you also explain why you quote it like that or do you want me to guess? A. Öztas (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You guessed well and put words (your own words) on the issue mentioned above -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:04, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I honestly don't think a painting brush was used, the milky way has brighter borders on each side that can naturally be captured by long exposure photos -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:53, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Giles Laurent: , thanks for your comment. Please take a look at the 3 versions in the history. Resize them at the same size, and superimpose them, each separately. Then you realize very clearly that yes, a painting brush was used. Moreover, it's very possible also that the initial upload was already more or less heavily edited. In this version, the center of the sky is too dark, and certainly not faithful -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:32, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I still don't know exactly what you mean by painting brush - it's the first time I've heard the term in this context - but if you mean masking, I've already commented on this with regard to the white and black levels. I'm just surprised at the astonishment, as this is a common process in image processing. Or are we talking at cross purposes? A. Öztas (talk) 13:11, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
"Painting brush" is the official name on many software editors, isn't it? Usually an icon with a "painting brush" 🖌. Now there's a 4th version uploaded. Not yet observed. But If you darken selectively some areas here and there, while the sky is supposed to be a giant uniform surface, it makes it fake -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:41, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for clarifying, what you mean. By your reasoning, wouldn't most photos then qualify as "fake", not only on FP? We can discuss this matter on my talk page, if you want. This would not only apply to (even slight) HDR images but also to those where, for example, a building is subtly emphasized. If you set the threshold for "fake" at any adjustment that doesn’t globally affect the entire image, then so be it — at least that's a clear position. As for the term "painting brush", as I mentioned earlier, I wasn't familiar with it in this context. In the software I use, this tool is called "draw mask". Either way, I hope we’ve now discussed this topic thoroughly. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Discussion continues below and I'm also interested in talking with other participants, having different points of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I've just checked the picture on my computer (I was previously on my phone) and it seems you were right that a painting brush was used.
However I don't think the result is very different at first sight from adjusting curves/exposure adjustments, which is something a lot of people do and the result doesn't look unatural to me (especially if you compare it to something really unnatural like this). But perhaps the center of the milky way was darkened too much (it's not supposed to be that much darker) and perhaps the brighter part shouldn't have been brightened with a paiting brush but with a global exposure/contrast adjustment because looking at thumbnail we see the brushstrokes and comparing it to the previous version, the brighter parts changed shape and were extended, which in the end changed a bit the shape of the milky way and is something that shouldn't happen.
Also, there's one other new thing I've noted now, there's a strange change change of exposure in this zone that might be improved -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Should be fixed, both. --A. Öztas (talk) 18:45, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Abstain Painting brush removed. @Giles Laurent: there's a noticeable difference between the second-third-fourth and the fifth version, and in the previous ones, there was no reason to darken artificially some zones in the sky so as to create strong and unnatural contrasts. Thanks for pointing this out, and for confirming the manipulation was not only my subjective impression. The sky is supposed to be flat. So the normal processing in this case is not local touches but should be global, yes -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:50, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Olimxon saroyi (Sitorai Moxi-Xossa majmuasi) 05.jpg

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 19:02:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Carved wooden door with a copper ring handle at Olimkhon palace. Bukhara, Uzbekistan.
  • Yes, and sharpness could be better too. I'm honestly not sure about this one. I made this downsample which is 8.5 megapixels and better but still corner sharpness isn't great. But the motif is really cool so unsure how to vote, will think about this one. Cmao20 (talk) 01:46, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Under Hell Gate Bridge on Randalls Island (60104).jpg

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 13:15:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Hell Gate walking path

File:Vexierkapelle Reifenberg Luftbild-20240714-RM-170015.jpg

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 11:31:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aerial view of the Vexier Chapel in Reifenberg

File:009 Greater flamingos male and female in the Camargue during mating season Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 10:38:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Greater flamingos male and female in the Camargue during mating season

File:Main courtyard of Bou Inania Madrasa, Fez, Marocco.jpg

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 10:12:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Main courtyard of Bou Inania Madrasa, Fez, Marocco

File:Magevee karpvähiline (Ostracoda).jpg

Voting period ends on 8 Dec 2024 at 03:23:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
+ The author created the image to be viewed as you see it. It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer, make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors. If you don't see errors right away, then there are none. You can ruin any image in Photoshop, but the author doesn't create the image so that someone can edit it in Photoshop. Janeklass (talk) 04:58, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  What?! "make changes in Photoshop, and then find errors"? I would be the last person to do that. And it's very clear from the file page that you are the sole and only uploader. You're of course free to do what you like with your pictures, but for me it's a similar case to this one or that one nominated last week. Sorry to be allowed to review here... When I read Ikan's review below ("I do see details well"), I had the impression it was a mirror of my comment (now crossed out) above ("Some details look interesting"). I got curious and then noticed the stacking issues. Please fix these errors like in this nomination. By the way, where do you find that "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:13, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You downloaded the image to your computer, increased the light in Photoshop, and then you saw the errors. The "errors" you pointed out do not disturb or affect the image. I am very sorry, but I think your assessment is unfair and is not given because they somehow affect the photo, but because you just want to scold. Janeklass (talk) 05:29, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • You darkened the image, not me ("background made darker" in your summary). And you made this change without notifying a (weak) supporter writing "Definitely too dark for me", nor other participants who could also find the image (really) too dark now. Photoshop helps to find potential issues like wrong embedded color profiles (which can make the appearance vary from a computer to another, example here). This was done to help you. It was a tool. But the stacking issues (now located) also appear in the current version -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:49, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    You raised the light and only then did you see errors that were otherwise not visible. For me, they do not affect the image and the problem does not exist. If you add light, you can see all sorts of things. As an author, the light is set the way I want it and it is not intended to be changed by anyone else. Janeklass (talk) 06:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. You darkened the picture (for everyone, not only for me). Proof in the history of the file page and in the summary you left. Given the critics (here and elsewhere by other participants), it would have been more judicious to brighten the picture instead of the contrary. Otherwise it's like you want to hide the mistakes. You also hide the whole content in this blackness.
  2. No, my first impression was : "Some details look interesting at the bottom". But because it was dark, it could be a wrong impression. Confirmation (I mean denial of "interesting details") comes now, yes. Same as here. I think light should be adjusted and FS problems resolved -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:52, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your words " + After increasing the light on Photoshop, I also notice focus stacking errors. Image notes added". I'm referring to the fact that you didn't see the errors before you increased the light. So you amplified the errors yourself, which are otherwise not so visible and they don't affect the overall impression of the image. But okay, I added a little more light and I won't change this file any more Janeklass (talk) 07:00, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment If my eyes are good, there is no difference in the light between the first version and this one? And your words "It is not okay for the viewer to download the image to their computer"... and worse: "the author doesn't create the image so that someone can edit it in Photoshop." Apologies, but this idea "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none" sounds a bit clumsy, according to the ton of similar nominations where errors / stitching problems are detected in the middle or even at the end of the voting period. A bunch of examples available in the archives. Currently the focus stacking errors are still present. Thus I don't change my vote -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:07, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Editing an image to amplify small flaws that aren't actually visible is very strange behavior to me. Janeklass (talk) 09:30, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Very visible now, even in the darkness. And also at the top right.
  2. Could be fixed / uploaded by someone else (not necessarily you).
  3. Alternative could be proposed. At least for the FS issues. Then it's a democratic choice. Could be also delisted and replaced by a more accurate version later. If you change your mind, or if someone else improves your image.
  4. Like it or not, that's how it works, actually. And how divergent opinions offer chances to improve.
  5. It's a mistake to believe that the purpose of increasing the light was "to amplify flaws". Certainly anyone else would / will do the same as observer or re-user, because it's very dark, then trying to evaluate the content fairly and see it under more favorable conditions is useful and / or necessary. The FS flaws popped up at this moment, and were not expected. Most of the users here are happy to meet the opportunity to correct their own images -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:16, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I am happy to correct mistakes when I see that the criticism is relevant. At this moment, I feel that the criticism has been overdone and criticized for the sake of criticizing. These "mistakes" are not visible in the picture and do not spoil the picture. Janeklass (talk) 11:28, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
These mistakes have just been revealed a few hours ago. And first reaction, you darkened the image, which had the effect of making the situation worse, and lengthening the discussion for everyone. It would undoubtedly be wiser to fix the issues like here or there. See also this interesting case -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:59, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I didn't darken the image because of your alleged "errors". I cropped the image and at the same time noticed lighter areas in the background and thought that the background would be better completely black. Janeklass (talk) 14:51, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... noticed something, too? For the record, you said "If you don't see errors right away, then there are none.". You changed the crop? You changed the light? Twice, already? Yes, things happen / appear in the light of a discussion, like in the light of a (well-exposed) photo -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:21, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You can keep your opinion. I'll stick to my position and won't fix alleged errors that aren't actually visible and don't affect the image. Besides, this picture's value lies elsewhere for me (and for Wikipedia). What we actually see in the picture is much more important here - whether it ranks among the best is secondary. In my opinion, Wikipedia isn't Instagram, and I add pictures that have genuine informative value. Janeklass (talk) 03:35, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
🛑Stop it now. "You can keep your opinion" and other derogatory comments written above are against COM:CIVIL. All various and subjective opinions here are welcome and encouraged on this section, per the guidelines at COM:FPC "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". You don't like criticisms, this does not give you permission to be disrespectful to those who don't share your view. You voted above, fine, we all respect your choice, did not contest anything. Do the same, please. Now enough. It's an open project. -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:34, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Is the author's position not important, or do you always have to agree with criticism? If so, I will try to improve myself in the future and will not engage in further discussion.
For now, this discussion is over for me. Janeklass (talk) 05:00, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very good. -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:18, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Pictures of the Sun by ESA Solar Orbiter

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 21:24:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • The Sun in UV light of 17.4 nanometres, taken by Solar Orbiter's Extreme Ultraviolet Imager (EUI) instrument, assembled from multiple images taken on 22 March 2023.
    The Sun in UV light of 17.4 nanometres, taken by Solar Orbiter's Extreme Ultraviolet Imager (EUI) instrument, assembled from multiple images taken on 22 March 2023.
  • A magnetogram of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight direction of the magnetic field on the Sun's disc, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
    A magnetogram of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight direction of the magnetic field on the Sun's disc, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
  • The velocity map of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight speed and direction of movement of material at the Sun's visible surface, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
    The velocity map of the Sun that shows the line-of-sight speed and direction of movement of material at the Sun's visible surface, measured by the Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023.
  • The Sun Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023, at a wavelength of 617 nanometres.
    The Sun Polarimetric and Helioseismic Imager (PHI) onboard the Solar Orbiter spacecraft on 22 March 2023, at a wavelength of 617 nanometres.

 Info Hacker news thread on the pics --David Osipov (talk) 08:58, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Спасо-преображенський собор в Одесі після влучання ракети 07.jpg

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 19:57:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Transfiguration Cathedral in Odesa. On July 23, 2023, the cathedral was severely damaged by a Russian missile attack

File:Inca jay (Cyanocorax yncas) Las Tangaras.jpg

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 16:22:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:029 Western cattle egret in the Camargue Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 08:18:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Western cattle egret in the Camargue

File:S-charl, Clemgia zijrivier van de Inn. 12-10-2024. (d.j.b) 04.jpg

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 06:11:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Кызылкуп на рассвете.jpg

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 03:37:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kyzylkup table mountain. Kyzylsai regional park, Mangystau District, Mangystau Region, Kazakhstan

File:Woman with hat in red dress, North Beach SF.jpg

Voting period ends on 7 Dec 2024 at 03:23:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Woman with hat in red dress, North Beach SF
  •  Support Many thanks for the appreciation, Екатерина Борисова. The picture was a real snapshot, we were first in a record store and then, as I recall, in a store next door, which we left with the friendly woman in red. During our walk through SF, my camera was always ready for spontaneous snapshots. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:30, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Busy background, nothing special. Yann (talk) 08:01, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose per Yann --Uoaei1 (talk) 08:42, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support When we want to show people walking on a city street the background will usually be busy; somehow the variety of the city must be included – if the background consists just of windows reflecting the sky or a wall we would not get the feeling that we are in the downtown. The vanishing lines of the row of cars on the left and of the buildings on the right, which converge above the centre of the picture, bring order to the composition; the woman seems to be walking towards this vanishing point, her placement slightly to the left adds tension to the composition. This placement, the bright colours of her clothing and the out-of-focus background make her stand out clearly from the background. For me, this is a good example of an intense, orderly and yet dynamic composition in the middle of the variety of a city centre. – Aristeas (talk) 16:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Yeah I think it's great. The colours, the outfit, the sense of movement, all superb. Good street photography. Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Thi (talk) 15:17, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Yann. -- Karelj (talk) 14:11, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:20200222 FIS NC COC Eisenerz PRC HS109 Women Yuna Kasai 850 4048.jpg

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 23:00:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Yuna Kasai of Japan at FIS Nordic Combined Continental Cup Eisenerz 2020.
 Abstain Interesting. It's not an answer to my question, though, right? -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:45, 1 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, forgot about that question. That's one of the many wind flags: a grey metal post and a red stripe of fabric. Granada (talk) 06:43, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 Support Thanks. I wonder if the image wouldn't be more striking vertical. And the position of the skier would be more accurate. However I understand the difficulty here to follow the trajectory and to keep the subject within the frame at the same time. --Basile Morin (talk) 06:50, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the vote! By vertical do you mean like e.g. this one? To be honest I find these quite boring. They are the easiest to take by just pointing your camera upwards to the ski jumper coming from the take off. This one is not the sharpest as it was also taken at the same event and marks the beginning of a panning shot following the athlete. The moment the athlete comes past me (like in the FPC) she is around 90km/h fast and just 2-3m away. If I only want to asure that the photo is sharp I do it like that example and set the exposure time to 1/1000s or less (depending on weather conditions). Granada (talk) 12:35, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I wrongly assumed the photo was tilted, but realize now that it's probably not. The other shot, even if "easier" is also very good. For the speed, yes, it makes sense. Still the background would appear more static / frozen than here -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:30, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:GRACE-FO Launch (NHQ201805220019).jpg

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 22:24:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket launch
Discussion about technical details
  • I wonder why Bill Ingalls (given that he is/was a professional photographer) did not pay more attention to details, both in the composition (which he could have checked calmly before the start) and in the post-processing (which is done later). We can accept the leaning verticals, but the cropped flowers at the bottom are unsatisfying (either there should be more of them in the frame or they should have been cut off completely), the CAs are obvious and (given the low resolution) quite prominent. And the whole image, which has been underexposed to preserve the highlights, should have been brightened in post-processing. Given the incredible expenditure necessary for space missions, one could expect a bit more care from the photographer, too. – Aristeas (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment I'm pretty sure this specific type of picture is taken remotely. The focal length is 16mm in full frame, it's unlikely a person would be allowed this close to a rocket launch. Chromatic aberration might have been corrected, I agree. I know what you mean about preservation of highlights and underexposure, but I think the key to this picture being "wow" are the dramatic steam clouds. To make them dramatic, you need the darker shadows within them. Even if you correct the levels to enhance the dark foreground with flowers, you might make the vapor cloud less dramatic and therefore the photo less "wow". Of course, it's possible to make a feathered selection of the grass/flowers area and correct it while preserving dramatic vapor, but I'm not sure it's allowed for journalistic type of photos from NASA. Tupungato (talk) 13:14, 28 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Of course I did not want to say that this is a bad photo; it has much “wow” and high educational value. I just stumbled over a certain disparity between the incredible expenditure and expense for such a space mission on the one hand and a certain lack of care for the details shown by the photographer on the other hand. – You are certainly right that this photo has been taken remotely; and I would also assume that the camera was set to continuous shooting (burst mode), so the photographer triggered remotely the start of the continuous series and this is just one photo selected from that series. That’s all fine. I just meant that whoever has placed the camera on the tripod (or whatever) before could have thought a little bit longer about the framing. You are also completely right that the underexposure is intentional and correct in order to get a good image of the dramatic steam clouds. I just think that whoever has processed the raw image file later could have spent a little bit more time to remove the CAs and to lift the exposure again, just to achieve a more realistic impression. It should not even be necessary to make a feathured selection of the dark parts; just increasing the exposure by e.g. 0.25 EV, reducing the highlights by 0.25 EV and increasing the brightness of the shadows by 0.5 EV or so would already improve the image without sacrificing the clouds or adulterating the realistic impression. No offence, I really appreciate your selection of this photo and (as said above) just stumbled about the details. – Aristeas (talk) 11:15, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Newgrange trails.jpg

Voting period ends on 6 Dec 2024 at 21:12:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Star trails over Newgrange Ireland

* Support --Ermell (talk) 23:03, 27 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Also this one by "AstroAnthony" is clearly a fake. There might be many other manipulations by this uploader (I don't want to waste hours examining each with a magnifying glass). It is not worth risking another time-consuming delisting process after potential POTY qualification like the previous case. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:21, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sure, if the author could provide the RAWs I would be happy to reconsider, but I think it's fair to assume that images by this user may be photomontages, particularly if they look 'too good to be true', and to vote accordingly. Cmao20 (talk) 02:59, 29 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Aegithalos caudatus (with feathers to pad the nest), Lodz (Poland) (js) 18.jpg

Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2024 at 11:00:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aegithalos caudatus (with feathers to pad the nest)
  • Follow-up  Comment Jerzy, this is really a lovely and wonderful photo, I (and other users) would really like to become it a Featured picture. We just think that the post-processing is not up to what your photo deserves. Modern tools allow to reduce the image noise greatly without sacrificing details (as old-styled noise removal did), therefore the new tools have rapidly become standard especially with wildlife photos. Just contact Poco a poco or e.g. Radomianin or me if you would appreciate a little help with this. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 10:57, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks to Aristeas for his engagement. The photo is too beautiful to let this nomination die. SwissTransfer link provided: This version is similar to Poco's (thanks for the edit), but in mine the colors are closer to the photographer's original. However, the degree of denoising and sharpness is similar to Poco's version. If you and the community find the edit acceptable, feel free to use it for an update. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 11:24, 30 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rękawka, Kraków, 20230411 1601 3488.jpg

Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 20:19:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Man dressed as the pagan god Veles at the traditional Rękawka festival in Kraków

File:Abandoned van in Marine Park (91076p).jpg

Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 19:46:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Abandoned Ford van by Gerritsen Creek, Brooklyn

Alternative

Abandoned Ford van by Gerritsen Creek, Brooklyn

File:Egyptian goose (Alopochen aegyptiaca) and goslings Burgerpark.jpg

Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 10:52:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Egyptian goose (Alopochen aegyptiaca) and goslings
  • Thanks for your update and sorry for my confusion. It's the idea of ​​"juvenile" that I wanted to introduce and I was also thinking that you would easily find the relevant subcategory. But it's a different branch and you're more than expert :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:35, 26 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bukchon-ro 11-gil street with hanok houses at blue hour in Bukchon Hanok Village Seoul.jpg

Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2024 at 07:56:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Dec 2024 at 16:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

"Wait for me daddy":British Columbia Regiment, DCO, marching in New Westminster, 1940
Photographically the focus is wrong (and the crop tight at the left), it's a shame, but this image has its own story (and yes, also own article on en-wiki). It has become an iconic photograph. We should take this into account.
Finally, a reminder about the voting process. COM:FPC: 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... -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:37, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 22:46, 2 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1940-1949


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)

Thu 28 Nov → Tue 03 Dec
Fri 29 Nov → Wed 04 Dec
Sat 30 Nov → Thu 05 Dec
Sun 01 Dec → Fri 06 Dec
Mon 02 Dec → Sat 07 Dec
Tue 03 Dec → Sun 08 Dec

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

Sun 24 Nov → Tue 03 Dec
Mon 25 Nov → Wed 04 Dec
Tue 26 Nov → Thu 05 Dec
Wed 27 Nov → Fri 06 Dec
Thu 28 Nov → Sat 07 Dec
Fri 29 Nov → Sun 08 Dec
Sat 30 Nov → Mon 09 Dec
Sun 01 Dec → Tue 10 Dec
Mon 02 Dec → Wed 11 Dec
Tue 03 Dec → Thu 12 Dec

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.

  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/December 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request

  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/December 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

  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/December 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=884719385"