Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates

Shortcut
This project page in other languages:

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 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:Front view of the Imperial Throne Hall Geunjeongjeon at Gyeongbokgung Palace with blue sky in Seoul.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Aug 2024 at 03:41:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

Mapas de España y Portugal - por el ingeniero de minas D. Federico de Botella y de Hornos

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2024 at 21:17:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

File:Oriental Shorthair kittens.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2024 at 20:03:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • We have users dedicated to nominating images from their special field of interest like space, fractals, birds, flowers, churches, Arctics, weather, old photos, whatever. Yet the user you decide to drop a daft remark on regarding their specialty, is the one interested in cats. --Cart (talk) 20:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • That article wasn't made as a promotion, only a test run at translating articles from sv-wiki (article not written by me), as I have explained to you before and you didn't say anything about at the time. Now you bring that up, with your own made up reason for why it was made, as soon as you want to throw some dirt my way, it's getting old. I've spent ten years here atoning for that first mistake (yes, I call it a mistake even though I told Admins on en-wp my real name and they cleared me for writing it) and you are still holding a grudge for that, even though I've tried to have the article deleted twice. Well, I'm not the one placing a link to my website in the description field on every photo I upload here. Up until a few years ago, that was a site that promoted your own photo business. --Cart (talk) 22:01, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Charles, please assume good faith. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:08, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Nothing spectacular, and pretty average, technically speaking. Wolverine XI 20:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support The animals are in their natural environment, they are practicing common daily activities of their species instinctively, they seem to be an undefined genetic variety with larger than usual ears, which catches my attention. I think it must have been difficult to take this photo due to the rapid movement of the cats playing and running around. I think it must have been challenging, I imagine pulling out these photos of miniature leopards, some carnivorous ancestor. --Wilfredor (talk) 21:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose This image isn't very sharp and the grass obstructs much of the lower subject without adding to the image. It doesn't have the same wow factor or rather "awwwwww" factor as this other image by the same user. I mean this one is so cute, has a shallow depth of field with the face in focus, and no distracting elements and its of the same species. Image:Oriental_shorthair_kitten.jpg --Needsmoreritalin (talk) 00:22, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Image converted to link. Please don't display other files on a nom as the FPCBot will read them as 'Alternatives' and mess up the closing process. --Cart (talk) 00:34, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Impala (Aepyceros melampus) female with red-billed oxpecker Kruger.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2024 at 17:27:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Idealbild aus der Steinzeit - Höhlenbewohner (Darnaut).jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2024 at 10:40:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
 
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Image is small size for an artwork, uncentered, and image quality is below the threshold for FPs. The image is not representative for the Stone Age as an historic period. It stretched for roughly 3.4 million years and it was only during the last 40,000 or 30,000 of those, that dogs became domesticated.--Cart (talk) 14:37, 22 July 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.
  1. The image is 2,704 × 1,386 and 2.5 MB. The size certainly isn't a problem, it's very large.
  2. From Stone Age – The period lasted for roughly 3.4 million years[1] and ended between 4,000 BC and 2,000 BC and dogs were domesticated around 15 k years ago. So the rationale at least is objectively false but not entirely sure what you mean with and assume with "representative for" there. Shouldn't have put the FPX template there for no good reason. --Prototyperspective (talk) 22:15, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
It might very well be a pretty painting, but it is a fantasy version of what the Stone Age might have looked like. It was made long before any modern archeological science had begun, so if there was a good photo of it, it could be nominated as just a painting and not as something that we should put forward as to what the age actually looked like. If you want a painting to represent what the era looked like as in "realistically depicting ancient society", I don't think this is the one. Stone Age people only had dogs for 1.17% percent of that period (at the end of it), so it's bit of a stretch to have this representing the era. It would be like having how things looked in 2023-2024 representing all of the last 2000 years. There is also a guy who looks like he is blowing a horn. The oldest musical instruments found are from 60,000 BC, so in the same ballpark as the dogs.
If you compare it to most of the other paintings that are promoted now, you'll find that it is indeed quite small. And with the off-center doorway/whatever and very poor technical quality, it's not enough for FP. --Cart (talk) 22:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just makes it more explicit that you seem to confuse Featured Pictures with Featured Photos even despite that there is a gallery type for nonphotographic media and that I linked it above. Nobody is assuming or stating it's a totally factual entirely accurate representation. I used that word realistically only in my support rationale, not in the nomination. Maybe one could clarify that this is showing a scene at the end of the stone age. If you look at the gallery for which this is nominated all or nearly all of them are how people imagined things. Maybe it's problematic that it isn't much informed by modern science and that one would need to attach text to clarify that if anything it would be toward the end of that period. However, this does not represent the whole era – maybe you think so because of the title but I was not suggesting that title was somehow displayed (at least without the explaining text). What matters is not the details but more general things like them being next to a cave, but the aspect of this being how people in recent history imagined humans in the past is also relevant. It's not clearly false and if it was it should be contextualized anyway. Also maybe the file should be moved from "aus der Steinzeit" to sth like "der Steinzeit" / "Imagined scene of the late Stone Age (1885 painting)". Prototyperspective (talk) 22:40, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Not confusing any galleries, I know pretty well what they stand for since I created many of them. But, sorry, even with all the caveats, the small file and low technical quality of it remains. --Cart (talk) 22:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Санкт-Петербург, площадь Стругацких сверху зимой.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 18:38:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Toronto Railway August 2017 03.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 09:40:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Traquet rieur Gabes.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 09:22:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • A high quality photo of a bird species like this does provide educational value. Not everyone will be aware that semiarid dessert supports significant birdlife. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:56, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Yes but not much of it and my view is that it's not sufficient to be FP. It shows how this particular species looks like (like the other photos of the species) but the educational value (especially given the large amount of FP photos like that, the limited relevance to people and society, the existing other media about the bird, etc) is limited. I don't know why the criteria of educational value is not more important to other editors here given the WMC pillars / the contents of the scope page. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:33, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:CH.VS.Zermatt Hotel-Wellnessresort-La-Ginabelle 4747 3x2-R 11K.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 09:05:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  Question This picture is upscaled? what's happened with the child face (right lower corner) --Wilfredor (talk) 21:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This must have been due to some window glass curve effect. I don't think the image was upscaled. The camera is capable of more than 100 MP. August (talk) 21:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Support Thanks for answering Wilfredor (talk) 21:51, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vidigal, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 08:38:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Brazil
  •   Info created and uploaded by Wilfredor, nominated by me. RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support -- RodRabelo7 (talk) 08:38, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Quality problem. F/2.8 = Limited depth of field. Out of focus foreground and background. ISO 5,000 = poor level of detail. Very high level of noise in the dark areas. Blown highlights on the beach. Also overprocessed (the whites are gray) -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:52, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Thank you, RodRabelo7, for this nomination. I reconstructed the image from RAW using NX Studio, applying a vignetting fix. I used Topaz Denoise for noise reduction. The ISO was set to 1600 due to the lighting conditions. I didn't use a tripod to avoid drawing attention in a favela. The aperture was set to 2.8 because the subject was far away, and at such distances, a larger aperture isn't necessary. It’s normal because it is a night photo for some areas to appear very bright while others are darker. --Wilfredor (talk) 23:53, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose I dont see DoF problems, but 2.8 means very unsharp on edges. Bigest problem is very strong CA, i think hours could be spent here to solve it, after it highligthed boards etc. Tripod would solve, but you didnt try it. Alternative has same problems. What is blown cant get back. --Mile (talk) 07:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I didn't use a tripod because it is a dangerous place to have such an expensive camera, I couldn't draw attention to myself so I had some problems in that place Wilfredor (talk) 12:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment I read that before, but i dont see how should this help to change my vote. You would have CA in any case, means a lot of work to solve it. I did like the photo in thumb, but when opened in 100 % not so much. --Mile (talk) 14:25, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alt version

 

  •   Info Another shoot in low level --Wilfredor (talk) 01:32, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose I dont see DoF problems, but 2.8 means very unsharp on edges. Bigest problem is very strong CA, i think hours could be spent here to solve it, after it highligthed boards etc. Tripod would solve, but you didnt try it. Alternative has same problems. What is blown cant get back. --Mile (talk) 07:46, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      chromatic aberration is gone Wilfredor (talk) 18:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment Its is, i wish you could do that with first one, or to try here midtones,shadows to incerase EV. 1st is too brigth, this one is a bit underexposed. --Mile (talk) 19:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Level of blur of the background. Yes, DoF is a real problem, not only on edges, also at the distance. Low level of detail due to high ISO: 2500 here or 5000 / 1600 in the previous version(s), it is far too excessive when you need to lift the shadows in post-process. Shooting at dark night without tripod is hard (more than blue hour). The picture is okay to document the place, but technically not one of the finest. Empirical solutions when you don't have a tripod: 1) use a simple (and more discreet) monopod, which generally allows you to reach one full second quite easily, 2) use a wall, or any edge of surrounding structure, then stabilize the camera with stones, 3) walk with a friend who masters martial arts :-) or with good eyes, capable of monitoring, 4) Possible sometimes to manually take multiple shots at different focus points, then carefully assembly them at home, 5) Go at blue hour, when there is still more light. It will also bring an appealing sky, while reducing the highlights -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:18, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peces mandarín (Synchiropus splendidus), Anilao, Filipinas, 2023-08-24, DD 233.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 08:04:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:D-6-78-134-131 Gertraudiskapelle Gerolzhofen mit Naturdenkmal ND-05851 Kapellenlinde 2.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 08:11:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Improved -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:34, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Shrungagiri Sri Shanmukha Swamy Temple 62.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 08:04:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Princetown (AU), Port Campbell National Park, Twelve Apostles -- 2019 -- 0930.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Jul 2024 at 03:18:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Neuro Muscular Junction.png

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2024 at 21:44:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
CA =   chromatic aberration -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:54, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose Not special or interesting enough. Wolverine XI 20:03, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Photos of mundane birds everybody has seen a thousand times are better than a heavily use actually-educational illustration about something that is relatively unknown and exciting. FP have absurd selection of featured pictures, these are ~always both noneducational and boring. Per COM:SCOPE a key function of the site is educational media and illustrations, not some kind of technical photography critique site. Prototyperspective (talk) 20:15, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Strong oppose per above. There are better diagrams than this. Since its a computer model, it can be recreated. I have a strong feeling this will be FPX'd soon. Sorry! --Zzzs (talk) 04:08, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is one of the best diagrams created by Commons users and I don't see an issue with it. Other FPs are also not perfect, just great but maybe I should just start voting oppose very often because the whole thing is a joke and some kind of technical photo competition rather than in lie with COM:SCOPE. And your rationale is not strong since you didn't even mentioned a reason nor what would be better if recreated. FPs should work with what there is in the commons, not have low standards for photos and extremely high standards for actually educational illustrations. One could easily fix the color of the pointer lines which I think is the only notable problem among the ones mentioned. Prototyperspective (talk) 09:59, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
 
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Per vote rationales. Also, a computer-generated image should not suffer from flaws caused by a camera (vignetting and CA). You are welcome to nominate this again if you present the original computer image, not just a photo of it. --Cart (talk) 15:15, 22 July 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:Serpiente marina de hocico ancho (Laticauda colubrina), Anilao, Filipinas, 2023-08-23, DD 04.jpg

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2024 at 20:35:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Look into my eyes - 1 - Photo by Giovanni Dall'Orto, July 16 1014.jpg

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2024 at 13:17:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Linderhof Palace 01.jpg

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2024 at 07:47:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Check the left edge of the building; it's leaning in. Not a lot, and it would've been fine if the right edge were symmetrical, but that one is leaning out. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:56, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Very slightly tilted, yes -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:12, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Done --Llez (talk) 06:10, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Great,   Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Helen Hunt Jackson by Charles F. Conly.jpg

Voting period ends on 29 Jul 2024 at 00:17:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Fauvette à lunettes Aqueduc de Zaghouan.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2024 at 21:12:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
You are clearly missing the point of having FPs. Ideally, we should have at least one image that is so great it can be viewed as an FP for each category and each article on the WikiProject. Saying that we don't need more FPs of birds because there are already hundreds of them, is simply ludicrous. We need more FPs (of all sorts of subjects), not less, if this is ever going to be the high quality project we strive to make it. And please stop referring to the front-page all the time with these boilerplate opposes, they are not a helpful critique. The front-page is an insignificant by-product, not a goal. Odd votes like this, are actually counterproductive since they keep many good photographers away from FPC, thereby limiting the selection of diverse photos here. Not all people show up voluntarily to such hostile environments to get their photos evaluated when photography is a hobby and not a livelihood you need to fight for. --Cart (talk) 11:16, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The same applies for illustrations and other images that are more educational than photos of which there are many thousands of the same subject. Prototyperspective (talk) 13:43, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Your reasoning sounds really warped to me. So in your opinion, what should we have FPs of since according to you, people and birds are now out of the question, and how many FPs do you think we should have on Commons to cover all articles and projects? You have only stated cons in your arguments, I'm interested in hearing your pros. I'm also curious about what categories here contain thousands of illustrations of the same subject. I do a lot of category sorting, and I don't recall coming across such categories. It would be interesting to see so many different takes on the same subject. --Cart (talk) 14:20, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe that all of Proto's opposing votes should be nullified. Criticizing pictures of birds and claiming they do not fit within COM:SCOPE, as well as using the Main Page as a reason to oppose, are unhelpful reasons. Additionally, Proto mentioned that they would "start voting oppose very often" because the image they nominated received multiple opposing votes due to quality and professionality. Based on their behavior, I doubt Proto understands how FPC works. Zzzs (talk) 15:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If we had a community decision that a user isn't fit to vote on FPC, for whatever reason, then all their votes (s & o) should be striked. That's how it's been done before with sockpuppets and disruptive users. Such a decision usually comes after a discussion on the FPC talk page. --Cart (talk) 15:38, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I believe this should be considered as a last resort if Proto continues with his disruptive behaviour on FPC. Zzzs (talk) 15:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
That is true. All other efforts and attempts to resolve things like this, should first be made before doing something drastic. --Cart (talk) 15:45, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I have posted on his talk page what COM:FPC is and warned him of his behaviour. Zzzs (talk) 16:49, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fingers crossed then. I really miss the days when FPC was a forum for photographers, where we supported each other and tried our darndest to create the most stunning images for the WikiProject. --Cart (talk) 18:42, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I've started a thread on COM:ANU. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:45, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
as well as using the Main Page as a reason to oppose
Objectively false.
If the standards are this high, I'm going to vote by putting images under a lens of a high standard. Prototyperspective (talk) 21:04, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You wrote "images like this shouldn't be highlighted such as included on the front-page" as part of your reason for opposing, so I don't see how you can deny that and call it "false". --Cart (talk) 21:14, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to 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. They aren't only shown on the frontpage but also highlighted with tools and methods that show featured pictures as well as more as a general thing where I disagree with that these "some of the finest on Commons". People turned this FP thing into a "some of the finest by photography technical criteria but nothing else" long ago but WMC is not a photography critique site (not saying technical photo critique shouldn't be done and that there shouldn't be photo communities on the site). Prototyperspective (talk) 21:37, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Commons as such may not be a photography critique site, but the COM:CRIT, QIC, VIC and FPC sure are. How else can we determine what photos are good. --Cart (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Their contents are already evaluated so technical flawlessness etc is already not the only criteria – people here just don't consider the criteria of educational content much usually. I quoted things that describe what FP is and what WMC is and from both I conclude that criteria of educational quality/degree is very appropriate. Prototyperspective (talk) 22:28, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You don't seem to be getting the point here, do you? --SHB2000 (talk) 05:06, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Miradouro da Cascata do Arado.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2024 at 14:16:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Stop Putler sign.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2024 at 13:04:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
I consider the picture photojournalism. It is nominated for the contemporary history gallery. Demonstrations and statements like this were common in 2022. --Thi (talk) 21:26, 22 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Surf Scoter Drake LBI.png

Voting period ends on 28 Jul 2024 at 02:37:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Huijeongdang Hall interior through open doors at Changdeokgung Palace in Seoul.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2024 at 22:52:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Panorama vom Plesseturm 2024.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2024 at 22:24:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Ναός Αγίας Βαρβάρας, Έρημος 1124.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2024 at 19:25:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:CH.BE.Boenigen 2021-08-15 Seaplane-Meeting 5322 16x9-R 8192x4608 s-ai Br1137.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2024 at 13:21:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Gonbo Rangjon Shinko La Zanskar Jun24 A7CR 00332.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jul 2024 at 12:35:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Beach of Cape Fiolent, Crimea.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2024 at 21:32:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
PetarM, yes, feel free to clean them if you see something and feel like it. --Argenberg (talk) 19:59, 21 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, PetarM, for the notification, and sorry for the late reply, your image notes didn't show up yesterday. Yes, rightly spotted. Thanks for having successfully fixed them -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:33, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vista panoramica dalla fortezza di Bertinoro - Emilia-Romagna - GT 03- 2024-07-01.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2024 at 14:38:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Casal de turistas caminha em uma duna, enquanto o dia morre nos Lençóis Maranhenses.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2024 at 12:01:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Comment Because Julio Cesar Goncalves Corrêa is not very active here, I have created a slightly edited version. The editing possibilities are somewhat limited in this case (because of the compression and the large gradients in the original file we run very soon into pixelation and posterization when we make major changes). However the CAs on contours as well as the colour noise on the dunes and water is mostly gone and the extreme vignetting on the top left corner fixed, too. (I have kept some of the slight vignetting at the left, removing it entirely seems to reduce the effect of the image.) @ArionStar, Basile Morin, and El Golli Mohamed: What do you think? If you like this version better, please nominate it as an alternative. If you have further hints for editing, I will try to fulfil them. Hope it helps, – Aristeas (talk) 10:22, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Your version is better El Golli Mohamed (talk) 16:51, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I understand the difficulty. CA is almost fixed. Upper left corner is showing a weird aspect, but it's much less obvious than on the previous version -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:34, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

 

File:Ripe Seeds Coffee Robusta Coorg Karnataka India Feb24 D72 25688.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2024 at 10:35:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Олонец, место крепости сверху.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2024 at 10:17:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Vue aerienne d'ensemble de la Sebkha de Moknine - Tunisie.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Jul 2024 at 07:42:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Rushing Clark's Grebes.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Jul 2024 at 14:49:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Art on Nubian house, Nagaa Suhayl Gharb, Egypt.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2024 at 17:05:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Amazing April 1928.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2024 at 13:19:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Pulitzer2018-mia-farrow-20180530-wp.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2024 at 13:13:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • And what about Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait? Yann (talk) 17:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't have any issues with community-rating them as high-quality or even "Featured picture", I just oppose them being featured on the Main page, the rss feeds, and the Wikipedia app. Most of the images on the page I think would be unsuited for these three things, however many also show special things that may make them worthy of FP since they are not about the person but the peculiarity of (e.g. the activity of the person etc) the image such as those:
Prototyperspective (talk) 17:45, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with the above. How is a woman's portrait photo a valid reason to oppose? Is it because there's no wow? Zzzs (talk) 17:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Portrait photos are unsuited for featured pictures why would they be suited for it? It's not about the wow, it's about the quality/characteristics of the image, portrait photos are inappropriate. See explanation above and it could be elaborated further despite that I don't know why people seem to find it surprising. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prototyperspective, images converted to links. Please do not display other images at a nomination. The FPCBot will read them as 'Alternatives' and this will complicate things for the nom closing. --Cart (talk) 18:11, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Undid vote for the reasons given here, a FP doesn't have to be a POTD and my points if anything are now only about which kinds of images (not) frequently nominated as FP but not about whether or not it should be FP. --Prototyperspective (talk) 15:24, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  Support In some contexts, it has happened to me that I write something but not completely because the other part remains in my head (I think this is the case). Another possibility is that the author of the negative vote comment has a native language other than English, and when translating, something that might have made sense does not entirely make sense, or due to their limited way of explaining and giving arguments. --Wilfredor (talk) 18:03, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You seem to refer to my comments without addressing any points outlined broadly in it but do not provide any rationale as to why this photo of a human should be a featured picture shown on the Main page. There's nothing special about it, it's a portrait photo of a notable human and people are better learning about people by looking at their Wikipedia article, e.g. via Featured Wikipedia articles, than at a photo of them. Why should this be a FP, please explain. Prototyperspective (talk) 18:10, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I get the impression that you are confusing Wikipedia with Wikimedia Commons. However, the criteria for what an FP means are different. --XRay 💬 04:30, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I was pointing out that you are basically confusing WMC with Wikipedia by putting portraint photos of notable people on the Main page which is something the featured articles on WP are for, not photos here.
Still no addressing of any points or explanation for why this would be good to be FP. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Where do you get this idea that articles about people should be featured on Wikipedia, but not images on Commons? Why would we not want to feature portaits? Kritzolina (talk) 15:32, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Prototyperspective, It is WMC that supplies the different Wikipedias with images, images of all sorts of subjects (including people), and it is on our interest to show what really good images should look like (including portraits of people). This is how we set standards for excellent photos: through examples. No images here are promoted simply for being on the front page of Commons, they are all selected because they are suitable for the different Wikipedia projects. And as for getting on the Commons front page, is in fact rather uncommon for a portrait to end up there since there are about ten times 365 FPs promoted each year. I think that your notion about people on FPs, is at the wrong forum. Here we only assess what photos are excellent; if you have a problem with them appearing on Commons front page as Picture of the day you should discuss that at that project's talk page, not here. --Cart (talk) 15:43, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yes indeed, that's why I recently struck my vote – didn't know not all FP are included there and thanks for pointing to the best suited place to discuss this. Prototyperspective (talk) 17:28, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Comment It is a very poor portrait with an unfortunate facial expression. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:07, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Oppose This is so boring. I don't see anything that is worth featuring. I mean, if the subject was in a better environment or doing something interesting, I might have supported. Wolverine XI 19:34, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --SHB2000 (talk) 23:37, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Appealing portrait in good quality. Honestly I do not understand most of the objections in this discussion. We may say that this isn’t a very innovative or creative kind of portrait; but a portrait must be adequate in style and technique to the character and mission of the person it shows, and IMHO this does apply here. – Aristeas (talk) 12:31, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    It is a high-quality portrait but why should it be featured on the Main page? And as for your rationale, there are millions of high-quality portraits, everybody with access to the Internet has seen lots of them. Prototyperspective (talk) 12:51, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
      Comment First I do not vote for an image because I want it to appear on the main page etc.; IMHO that’s a minor matter. I vote pro/contra images in order to help to select the featured pictures. Second, maybe there are millions of high-quality portraits, but (it’s a pity) only very few high-quality portraits with a free license – browse Wikimedia Commons and you will see that 99.9% of our portrait photographs are of low or modest quality. Third, after reading about Mia Farrow and browsing photos of her, I have the impression that this photo is a very fitting portrait that matches her character. It would be inappropriate to portrait Farrow e.g. like Dalí. You see I do not just vote “yes”, but I have taken about one hour of research before casting my vote. So you have every right to disagree and to vote against this photo, if you follow other arguments, but you do not need to quarrel with me about my vote – I have given valid reasons for it. – Aristeas (talk) 13:15, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support A charming portrait of excellent quality. And if I look at the other FIs from that gallery, I prefer this one to many others. As to the point of why portraits in general should be featured ... I don't understand the distinction from any other kind of images. There are also millions of high quality images of animals, plants, landscapes and buildings out there. We are showing the best of what we have in all kinds of topic areas as featured images and in my opinion, this one stands out for the reasons Aristeas also points out. This person is photographed in a way that seems very fitting. --Kritzolina (talk) 13:08, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support ★ 18:59, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 14:18, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support Per Kritzolina and Aristeas. --Terragio67 (talk) 15:24, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:58, 18 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •   Weak oppose Wonderful portrait with very good light and DoF. But for me the tight crop at the bottom spoils the composition. --August (talk) 09:18, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Das Grüne Band am Trappstadter Hügel 2.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2024 at 04:51:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Trier, 07-12-2023 (actm.) 24.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2024 at 04:27:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Vulcão dos Capelinhos 2023-03-04-7.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jul 2024 at 01:13:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
@Aristeas: thank you very much for the thoughtful comments! You 100% understand the essence of my post-processing philosophy. This very desolate landscape, which reminded me of Iceland a lot, is not at all typical of the Azores, where lush vegetation usually dominates. Combined with ominous clouds and setting sun, I was hoping to convey the brooding atmosphere of the moment. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:56, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Scoliid wasp (Megascolia bidens) male Cap Bon 2.jpg

Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2024 at 17:14:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Jul 2024 at 03:37:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Minor detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:40, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fortunately the heavy stones of this building dating from the 11th-13th century did not move with the wind :-) Thanks -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I don't upload photos of buildings, but I have to say I would have chosen a higher shutter speed and higher ISO on my camera to go with F8 on a windy day. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:32, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
You should upload pictures of buildings! I'm sure there are a lot of interesting places from all the countries you've visited -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure buildings are classified as part of wildlife photography. Zzzs (talk) 19:39, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No, but when you travel, you're not always in the jungle. Sometimes in a city, sometimes near a temple that is worth a visit, a bridge, a house... This goat in freedom was taken only 50 minutes later, in the same site. This bird eating a fish was taken in the pond of a temple -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:18, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I did upload a few shots from Cambodia; Peru; Brazil; Kenya; St Lucia; Egypt and England when I signed up... Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:42, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Love Peru and Egypt! Thanks for the share. If you have more / recent works like those, please upload! :-) Basile Morin (talk) 12:12, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
:-) In the bathroom? -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:15, 15 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
But seriously, yes, Ta Prohm Khmer temple, in Lara Croft: Tomb Raider, located 300 kilometers away, in Siem Reap, was built at the same period -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:27, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
A pleasure to read you (don't be sorry!), thanks!
Another view of this building, highlighting architectural elements: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Stone gate with columns and Buddhist reliefs leading to a clothed statue of the Buddha seated, Wat Phou temple, Champasak, Laos.jpg -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:09, 17 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]


Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 15 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 23 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]



Timetable (day 5 after nomination)

Thu 18 Jul → Tue 23 Jul
Fri 19 Jul → Wed 24 Jul
Sat 20 Jul → Thu 25 Jul
Sun 21 Jul → Fri 26 Jul
Mon 22 Jul → Sat 27 Jul
Tue 23 Jul → Sun 28 Jul

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

Sun 14 Jul → Tue 23 Jul
Mon 15 Jul → Wed 24 Jul
Tue 16 Jul → Thu 25 Jul
Wed 17 Jul → Fri 26 Jul
Thu 18 Jul → Sat 27 Jul
Fri 19 Jul → Sun 28 Jul
Sat 20 Jul → Mon 29 Jul
Sun 21 Jul → Tue 30 Jul
Mon 22 Jul → Wed 31 Jul
Tue 23 Jul → Thu 01 Aug

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/July 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/July 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/July 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"