Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured 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 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 21 Mar 2025 at 08:53:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
Info Coronation of the Virgin (in the center), Saint Peter (left), and Paul the Apostle (right), main altar, parish church St. Genesius, Riedböhringen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany. To prevent a discussion: The three blue columns on the left side of the altar are also not exactly vertical in reality; created by Llez – uploaded by Llez – nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:53, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Llez (talk) 08:53, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 20:37:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info Black-backed jackal (Lupulella mesomelas schmidti), Masai Mara, Kenya. The black-backed jackal has occupied eastern and southern Africa for at least 2–3 million years, as shown by fossil deposits in Kenya, Tanzania, and South Africa. This omnivore occupies a wide range of habitats, from arid coastal deserts to areas with more than 2000 mm of rainfall. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Good sharpness and composition Cmao20 (talk) 23:00, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 13:37:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing and Textiles
Info All by me, -- Cart (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cart (talk) 13:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice arrangement Cmao20 (talk) 16:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Original picture An insect photographer (talk) 17:32, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 19:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Clean background, good quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:08, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good, and something different. Yann (talk) 09:13, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:30, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 12:11:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Aurora
Info The auroras we often see in photos are the arcs or curtains that span over a large part of the sky, usually photographed in landscape format. But sometimes you are lucky enough to get these tall pillars stabbing down from the sky. They usually don’t last more than a minute or two, and you need to keep your head on a swivel on such nights because they pop up in random sections of the sky, almost like they are taunting you. These pillars that are hundreds of kilometers high (reaching the altitudes where satellites are [1]), are easier to see down at my latitude than up at the Polar circle, since we see them from the side and people further up north get a worm’s eye view of them from below. I don’t think this is a STEVE, since those tend to be even longer. There might be a couple of proto-STEVEs in the pillar since the white-ish light lingered longer than the pillar, but they are very insignificant. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 12:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cart (talk) 12:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Wow! Very impressive, and good description too. Yann (talk) 12:54, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Stunning Cmao20 (talk) 16:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. When the pillars appear, it's impossible to remain objective. I get goosebumps every time I see them. --Cart (talk) 17:28, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful and thank you for your description. An insect photographer (talk) 17:47, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice ! - Benh (talk) 19:23, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --A.Savin 20:22, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:29, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 10:50:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Italy
Info Facade of a house at 277, Fondamenta Cavanella in Burano (Italy). All by me -- Ermell (talk) 10:50, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Ermell (talk) 10:50, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 11:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 12:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support This was on my list to nominate Cmao20 (talk) 16:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support This was not on my list, but now I see it I think I should start a list :-) Striking facade color and nice composition with the single-colored linen -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:29, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 09:48:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Alcedinidae (Kingfishers)
Info created & uploaded by Ashraf747 – nominated by RockyMasum -- Rocky Masum (talk) 09:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Rocky Masum (talk) 09:48, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:42, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Very well frozen in flight, striking angle of view, smooth bokeh -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:18, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 09:14, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:28, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 06:04:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Psittaculidae (True Parrots)
Info A Rose-ringed parakeet (Psittacula krameri) and her two chicks in tree hole. Created & uploaded by Princepauljoy – nominated by আফতাবুজ্জামান -- আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- আফতাবুজ্জামান (talk) 06:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Rocky Masum (talk) 09:51, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment There seems to be a green cast. Fixable? Yann (talk) 16:00, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Weak support Great composition but less than great quality Cmao20 (talk) 16:50, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:42, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 05:56:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae
Info Hippeastrum houseplant. The delicate beauty of the flower. Focus stack of 9 photos.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:56, 11 March 2025 (UTC)Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:56, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 16:42, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:56, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2025 at 03:11:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Cambodia
Info The royal palace of Cambodia. IMO Good composition and quality. created by Halavar – uploaded by Halavar – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 11:53, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:42, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Quite well balanced and pleasant light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:20, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:55, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2025 at 23:21:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People_at_work
Info created by Sofiane mohammed amri – nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 23:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 23:21, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2025 at 22:06:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passerellidae_(New_world_sparrows)
Info Chipping sparrow (Spizella passerina) on a chain-link fence. This one is, of course, not the most detailed photo of a chipping sparrow that we have -- it's more about the framing/pattern/bokeh. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 22:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 22:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support "Mr. DeMille, I'm Ready for My Close Up". Cool compo really showing that these birds are so comfortable in human environments. -Cart (talk) 23:47, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 12:33, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, but ordinary picture of an ordinary bird. In brief, no wow. Yann (talk) 12:55, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2025 at 19:06:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Fringillidae_(Finches_and_Allies)
Info American goldfinch (Spinus tristis) at a feeder. Feeder shot, but the comp/detail/light seem worth a nom. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 19:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 19:06, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Yes feeder shot, but since the feeder is color-coded for this bird, I don't mind. Well balanced. --Cart (talk) 23:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:42, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice composition. Per Cart, the feeder's colour is quite helpful here Cmao20 (talk) 16:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2025 at 17:36:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Germany
Info In my opinion a satisfying and well composed photo that gets more interesting and painterly the more you look at it. created by Milseburg – uploaded by Milseburg – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:36, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 17:36, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment Nice clean composition, but the colors seem a bit too subdued. Any chance of fixing this? --Cart (talk) 23:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
- It's a matter of taste but they look fine to me, let's see what others think Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- I know. And for the record, I'm not talking about saturation or luminance, it's the amount of dark tones (black) in the overall colors. There is a subtle difference. But since this is a photo with an award, I see now nothing can be done about it and I'll just drop the request. --Cart (talk) 11:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- It's a matter of taste but they look fine to me, let's see what others think Cmao20 (talk) 03:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support If I were editing this photo, I too would be tempted to boost saturation. Yet, I find this subdued look both aesthetically pleasing and true to life. I can picture myself on a sunny summer afternoon, walking through these muted yellow fields and squinting into the intense steel blue sky. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:49, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support It's the colour of stubble fields, so I think it's perfectly ok. More saturation would look artificial. --imehling (talk) 09:06, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- Not saturation, dark tones. A very subtle difference. --Cart (talk) 11:17, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2025 at 14:13:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Historical
Info created by Thure de Thulstrup, restored and uploaded by Adam Cuerden, nominated by Yann
Info Representation of the Battle of Antietam by Thure de Thulstrup (1848–1930), which took place during the American Civil War on September 17, 1862.
Support Historical value, interesting work of art, very high resolution, good restoration. -- Yann (talk) 14:13, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 23:55, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:41, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- Just realise I will be making additional fixes, especially to the border. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:41, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2025 at 21:06:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural_elements#Windows
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 21:06, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Weak support I've seen a lot of similar photos to this one but I do like the light here, plus the splash of green in the bottom right to break up the regularity of the shapes Cmao20 (talk) 19:43, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:46, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Good quality and a nice photo, but it doesn't pass the bar of wow or originality for me for an FP. Sorry. --Cart (talk) 23:57, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose What cart said. Also, as a nitpick, the perspective correction isn't perfect --- the top edge is sloping down towards the left. The sharpness is also not perfect but that's expected for a perspective corrected photo like this. I generally like architecture shots like this, though. dllu (talk) 04:49, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2025 at 21:03:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 21:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 21:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:40, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment I like the mood, but there are some flaws on the roof borders. Could you fix that? --Rbrechko (talk) 12:29, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Good composition and very good light - stormy atmosphere + the splash of golden light on the right Cmao20 (talk) 19:42, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:42, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:23, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2025 at 16:23:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Norway
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:23, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 19:59, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:10, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Sorry, nice light and good quality but neither an outstanding composition nor motif for me. I feel like the vantage point seems too high so I seem to be looking down at the dock from somewhere above it, and that has the effect of highlighting the somewhat chaotic background. I will withdraw this vote if I'm the only dissenting voice so as to enable five-day promotion. Cmao20 (talk) 19:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support for the originality of this little floating sauna, humble among all those yachts. --Cart (talk) 23:59, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 16:31, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2025 at 15:20:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created and uploaded by Oliver Mark, nominated by Yann
Support -- Yann (talk) 15:20, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose A great expression for an unusual portrait, but unfortunately the irregular ceiling lights in the background are wrecking the scene for me. --Cart (talk) 00:02, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination Yann (talk) 09:16, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2025 at 12:54:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Russia
Info Rose Pavilion, Pavlovsk, Saint Petersburg created and uploaded by Никонико962 - nominated by FBilula (talk) 12:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- FBilula (talk) 12:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support I don't really like the shadows but there's enough in the architecture, quality, and colours for me to support Cmao20 (talk) 19:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:42, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:06, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:38, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2025 at 12:56:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Russia
Info Grand Cascade of en:Peterhof Palace, Saint Petersburg created and uploaded by Елена Нечипоренко - nominated by FBilula (talk) 12:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- FBilula (talk) 12:56, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:18, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 20:00, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:41, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 00:53, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, to me the crop looks to random and unbalenced for a FP. --Milseburg (talk) 17:55, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:41, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support One of the most vibrant and dynamic castle photos I've seen here. Very refreshing. --Cart (talk) 00:05, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --per Cart Famberhorst (talk) 18:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2025 at 05:34:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Iridaceae
Info Covered with dew drops Crocus tommasinianus Focus stack of 10 photos. The photo was taken on a misty morning with temperatures around freezing.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:17, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:11, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 20:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:39, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 00:06, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 02:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:37, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2025 at 21:28:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Malvaceae
Info African baobab (Adansonia digitata), Tarangire National Park, Tanzania Poco a poco (talk) 21:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:28, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Peulle (talk) 23:32, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Striking angle and composition, I love how the tree seems to have a 'door' in it. Cmao20 (talk) 01:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 06:37, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support —Bruce1eetalk 07:21, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 20:01, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Looks like tree from Sleepy Hollow :) -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 00:52, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 00:07, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 15:36, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Neutral-- Beautiful (fairy) tree where a Fairy could live. But in my opinion the photo at the top, left and bottom is cropped too tightly.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:17, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- Famberhorst wasn't a big issue IMHO give that it isn't a massive subject but I added a bit more of crop, better? Poco a poco (talk) 20:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for your message. It seems that little has changed. The bottom is the biggest problem for me. Too tight for the wide spreading trunk. It does the tree a bit of an injustice.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:48, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2025 at 18:36:48
-
Older version
-
Newer version
Info I propose to delist the featured image and replace it with an image taken from a different angle, in better lighting conditions, following the criticisms in the original nomination. (Original nomination)
Delist and replace -- Terragio67 (talk) 18:36, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Delist and replace In the new picture, several parts are better represented in both light conditions and definition with respect to the one already featured. Thanks for it. --Harlock81 (talk) 17:18, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Delist and replace Per above Poco a poco (talk)•
Delist and replace per above Cmao20 (talk) 19:58, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2025 at 16:02:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Ukraine
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Rbrechko -- Rbrechko (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Rbrechko (talk) 16:02, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 01:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment In this case I think it would be better to go for the center of mass for the whole structure, and put that in the middle of the photo, rather than just using the tower. See note, what do you think? --Cart (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 02:12, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Weak support Per Cart.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:08, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2025 at 09:30:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info all by imehling -- imehling (talk) 09:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- imehling (talk) 09:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Majestic view Cmao20 (talk) 01:35, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 02:11, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful and rarely shown mountain landscap. An insect photographer (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2025 at 05:16:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#California
Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:16, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:16, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 16:05, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:34, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Good colours and composition. Satisfying photo. Cmao20 (talk) 01:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:49, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 06:44, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20; indeed very beautiful composition and contrast of blue with yellow. – Aristeas (talk) 17:33, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 20:02, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:15, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Milseburg (talk) 17:37, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:38, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Neutral Sorry, but to me the reflection of the tree is not so interesting or defined in this photo that it requires this much space. I would have preferred less water and more sky here. --Cart (talk) 00:14, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2025 at 02:36:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#China
Info created by dllu – uploaded by dllu – nominated by Dllu -- dllu (talk) 02:36, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- dllu (talk) 02:36, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 06:52, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Great picture, though some more space at the top would be even better in my view --imehling (talk) 09:33, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:50, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rbrechko (talk) 16:07, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:27, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:33, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 21:41, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Neutral I'm honestly bothered by the strange reflections in the water and the tight crop on top but I won't oppose if everyone else judges it to be FP. Cmao20 (talk) 01:34, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support though I do agree with Cmao (but don't see it as significant enough to oppose). --SHB2000 (talk) 04:50, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 16:36, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 20:03, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Milseburg (talk) 17:53, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 00:15, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:02, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2025 at 23:11:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
Info created by dllu – uploaded by dllu – nominated by Dllu -- dllu (talk) 23:11, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- dllu (talk) 23:11, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose
Support I agree the sharpness could be better but the resolution is huge Cmao20 (talk) 01:33, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Neutral Right. Resolution of the picture is massive so I think my oppose was too harsh. --imehling (talk) 08:15, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Neutral The color compo here is great and sharpness is fine. The resolution is almost ridiculously big for such a motif, and if you downsize it by 50% it will be fine and about the usual size for car photos. Seems like a lot of new cameras that yields these big files, don't really put a lot of extra detail or information in them. However, I agree with Imehling, less road and more tree would have been better for me. (Most of all less road.) --Cart (talk) 00:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
- There's plenty of detail in the front of the car which is in focus. And there is definitely more detail or information in high resolution photos. Just don't pixel peep at 100% --- print it out at 2 m width and compare it side by side against a 24 megapixel photo and the difference is stark. dllu (talk) 01:40, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2025 at 10:04:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Pieridae (Whites and Sulphurs)
Info created by Anitava Roy – uploaded by Anitava Roy – nominated by Atudu -- Atudu (talk) 10:04, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Atudu (talk) 10:04, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Nice reflection, but unfortunately the image is not sharp Cmao20 (talk) 13:26, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Question Why has the pupa been removed from where it was developing? Will it not die now? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:09, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2025 at 21:22:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info Liebherr LRB 355 pile driving and drilling rig at the Unteroberndorf (Breitengüßbach) railway construction site. All by me Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support I wish we had more images of this kind. Thanks for sharing! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:07, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support —Bruce1eetalk 07:00, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:26, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:49, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:27, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:36, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:47, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:53, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:22, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Great that the machine appears right over the people; this emphasizes its size (and potential danger). – Aristeas (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:12, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Weak support I miss the upper part of the machine, but it's still very impressive image. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 00:49, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Great work photos as usual by Ermell. --Cart (talk) 00:21, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Aristeas. And dramatic sky. But also per Екатерина Борисова -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:28, 12 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2025 at 18:11:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1880-1889
Info created by Charles Roscoe Savage – restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:11, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:11, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:30, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice self-portrait, it was certainly not easy to get it sharp exactly at the front eye. Very good restoration. – Aristeas (talk) 17:29, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:13, 10 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 00:23, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:01, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2025 at 14:51:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Computer-generated#Others
Info created by Blender Studio – uploaded by PantheraLeo1359531 – nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:51, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Jagged edges in several places, resembling compression artefacts. That said, perhaps we should have a discussion on the use of AI images here; we're running the risk of flooding Commons with such images rather than user generated contents. I know this is part of a larger discussion, but still one that the Commons community will have to face sooner or later.--Peulle (talk) 08:42, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- FYI, Blender is not an AI. It is a free software. Yann (talk) 10:19, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- Okay, so what is the difference? Is it like Paint, where a user creates the picture? Or is it generated by a computer - in which case the point is the same anyway?--Peulle (talk) 11:16, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- There is a huge difference between this and AI. Blender is more like the kind of technology used to make computer-animated films such as those of Pixar. I believe it has actually been used to make animated films in the past. Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- It cannot be AI. If you download the corresponding Blender file, you will see the 3D scene. As splash screen of a Blender version, it shows one of the many possibilities with Blender :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:31, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- There is a huge difference between this and AI. Blender is more like the kind of technology used to make computer-animated films such as those of Pixar. I believe it has actually been used to make animated films in the past. Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support It's a cool example of what this kind of software can do with a skilled user Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support I agrre with Cmao20. Also, there is not the intention to look "real". At the full screen level, it seems more a paint than a photograph, and it is presented as a computer-generated image. --Harlock81 (talk) 17:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 20:01, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Per Cmao20. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 22:16, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 08:39, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support – honestly creating this with Blender is pretty amazing. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:54, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2025 at 07:45:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Denmark
Info Aerial photo of Lilleborg, Bornholm, all by me --A.Savin 07:45, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --A.Savin 07:45, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I'm a bit bothered by the processing of the wall (and trees in the centre), so I don't think the technical quality is quite there for an FP.--Peulle (talk) 08:12, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice aerial photo, good composition. Detail is not outstanding, but it's fine for an aerial photo. Bornholm is a really cool place Cmao20 (talk) 10:31, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Quite a nice composition but please check the level of noise at the lower right corner -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:23, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent representation of this charming little castle hill. – Aristeas (talk) 19:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Aristeas. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:55, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 08:48, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. An insect photographer (talk) 19:20, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2025 at 08:43:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Germany
Info created by Llez – uploaded by Llez – nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:43, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Llez (talk) 08:43, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment Around brown dome on the left there is a CA or halo around it --Ezarateesteban 22:16, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Sorry. I like the composition although I have seen panoramas with more pixel level detail, but on the right hand side the horizon falls away quite drastically and I think that's an obvious enough flaw that I can't support. Cmao20 (talk) 00:21, 6 March 2025 (UTC)Oppose
Oppose A decent document but not an exceptional one, in my view. Too much clouds and empty sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Info Cmao20 remarks, that "the horizon falls away quite drastically" and that's "obvious enough" flaw that he can't support. In reality, the horizon does not fall, it is even. The reason for this "optical illusion" is, if you look at this place on a map that at this point the shoreline bends from northwest to southwest. The apparent bending of the horizon is therefore not due to the incorrect panorama setting, but is geographically based on the course of the shoreline. --Llez (talk) 06:01, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- I've struck my vote. I'm still not sure I like how it looks, but yes, fair enough. Cmao20 (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment My suggestion is to rotate the rightmost frame 1.5° anti-clockwise. The horizon there also looks tilted to me. Apart from that, it's outstanding and a very photogenic subject. I don't see a halo. The attractive clouds mean that the sky isn't empty. The weather and lighting are just right. --Milseburg (talk) 12:37, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Info I made a new panorama from raw with the rotated rightmost frame, as suggested by Milseburg. I hope it is OK now. --Llez (talk) 16:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I agree, having only one big element in the compo makes the panorama empty and uninteresting Poco a poco (talk) 17:01, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support The waterfront is presented very well to me now. The Atlantic Hotel Sail City inevitably creates a lot of sky, but the sky is not uninteresting to me because of the clouds. The notes have been very helpful but are now lost after uploading the new version. Please restore them. To me they will be again another plus point. --Milseburg (talk) 12:52, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Done Notes added, also in the nomination page; thanks for your review --Llez (talk) 06:20, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Milseburg.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:51, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:55, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:41, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:40, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Weak support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2025 at 02:03:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1860-1869
Info created by the Webster Brothers – restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:03, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:03, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Info If anyone wants to make a Creator template for the Webster Brothers, I'm not quite sure how to make a two-person template, but all the details are in a footnote on the image page. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:03, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 05:17, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support – Aristeas (talk) 19:53, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:39, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 17:25, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support –An insect photographer (talk) 19:16, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2025 at 14:32:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain#Canary Islands
Info all by imehling -- imehling (talk) 14:32, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- imehling (talk) 14:32, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful and stark landscape, looks like it could be a different planet Cmao20 (talk) 15:00, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:35, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 14:28, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, the light is not compelling in my view.
Subject in the shadow,ordinary sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:58, 6 March 2025 (UTC) updated comment -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:32, 12 March 2025 (UTC)- The subject is definitely not in the shadow, it's just black basalt. --imehling (talk) 07:44, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- Ok, I think it seems to be in the shadow because the midday light comes from the left, completely. Compared to the same landscape shot under a better angle, for example, here the picture lacks contrasts and shades. It's almost a contrejour. Then I stand with my first impression of bad light. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:03, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment I also think that the dark areas need to be brightened up. Many of your images from this trip seem a little too dark to me in comparison to other shots from there. --Milseburg (talk) 12:43, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
- Ok, thanks for the reviews. I have uploaded a brighter version with part of the sky cropped out. --imehling (talk) 16:57, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Per Basile Poco a poco (talk) 17:00, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:15, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice improvement for me. --Famberhorst (talk) 06:27, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Famberhorst. --Milseburg (talk) 12:54, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 19:33, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support much better. imehling you should ping the other voters.Ermell (talk) 20:02, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:37, 8 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:57, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2025 at 13:58:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera
Info created/uploaded by Fedaro – nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 13:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Ezarateesteban 13:58, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Stacked from 296 images, wow! Yann (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Gioele Serra (talk) 17:45, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Some cleaning of spots in the unsharp areas would be an improvement but well done, Fedaro! Poco a poco (talk) 17:17, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Some gaps in the hair on the underside could still be improved. --Ermell (talk) 21:23, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 23:51, 3 March 2025 (UTC)
Strong support In spite of minor flaws noted above, this is an outstanding achievement and extremely impressive Cmao20 (talk) 02:07, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:15, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --imehling (talk) 19:37, 4 March 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. --Harlock81 (talk) 14:27, 5 March 2025 (UTC)
Comment An interesting attempt but technical weaknesses with visible flaws everywhere, especially in the layers at the bottom (image note added). Also many artifacts clutter the background -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:10, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 07:21, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Oppose per Basile. It's pretty glaring once pointed out. --Peulle (talk) 08:20, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support fedaro (talk) 12:19, 6 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 07:02, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support The flaws are a thing, but considering these resolution, and what a motif! Far better than the images from the school books --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:55, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
- In theory, the 296 images could be uploaded as image series (lossless compressed) as source material, and the flaws could be repaired afterwards, if it is an issue later --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 17:57, 7 March 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:13, 9 March 2025 (UTC)
Support JukoFF (talk) 17:43, 11 March 2025 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)
Fri 07 Mar → Wed 12 Mar Sat 08 Mar → Thu 13 Mar Sun 09 Mar → Fri 14 Mar Mon 10 Mar → Sat 15 Mar Tue 11 Mar → Sun 16 Mar Wed 12 Mar → Mon 17 Mar
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Mon 03 Mar → Wed 12 Mar Tue 04 Mar → Thu 13 Mar Wed 05 Mar → Fri 14 Mar Thu 06 Mar → Sat 15 Mar Fri 07 Mar → Sun 16 Mar Sat 08 Mar → Mon 17 Mar Sun 09 Mar → Tue 18 Mar Mon 10 Mar → Wed 19 Mar Tue 11 Mar → Thu 20 Mar Wed 12 Mar → Fri 21 Mar
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/March 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/March 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/March 2025), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.