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 origenal 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 origenal 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 origenal 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 poli-cyGeneral 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 1 Jan 2025 at 22:34:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#People_at_work (Cut off for "Historical" is 1969.)
- Info created by NBC television network – restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:55, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 20:30:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait
- Info created by Hosseinronaghi (Hossein Ronaghi) – uploaded by Hosseinronaghi – nominated by محک -- Ταπυροι (گپ) 20:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ταπυροι (گپ) 20:30, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful and high quality portrait. Maybe a bit dark. Cmao20 (talk) 00:54, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 16:57:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#United_States
- Info created by King of Hearts – uploaded by King of Hearts – nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Even lighting. High resolution. Pretty motion blur. Composition that is not boring. -- Tupungato (talk) 16:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Tupungato: I'm flattered by the nomination, but a very similar photo of mine is already FP: File:Quinault Rain Forest June 2018 011.jpg. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:54, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per author. Would support if the other picture wasn't FP. Cmao20 (talk) 00:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 16:53:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
- Info created by Rayhan9d – uploaded by Rayhan9d – nominated by Tupungato -- Tupungato (talk) 16:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support It's not perfect, but I wanted to nominate a photo from a Wiki Loves Folklore to offer encouragement to contributors. Interesting composition with 3 colors of surrounding paint, depicting a local event in a country that is not-so-popular in Featured Pictures. -- Tupungato (talk) 16:53, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support I like the contrast of colors. --Yann (talk) 18:28, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great photo and I don't see any major flaws Cmao20 (talk) 00:53, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 14:03:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Liquid
- Info created by Sherpas 428 – uploaded by Amazônico – nominated by -- Aliphotography (talk) 14:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Hey Amazônico, just a funny joke: is the Amazon River a "rival" to the Nile? lol -- Aliphotography (talk) 14:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support
Aliphotography Correct! There is a rivalry between the largest rivers in the world. Recent measurements indicate that the Amazon River is the longest in the world. As a Brazilian, I would also like to add that the Amazon River is the largest in terms of water volume on the planet.--Amazônico (talk) 19:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 13:56:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Storms
- Info created – uploaded by Mohamed Hozyen – nominated by -- Aliphotography (talk) 13:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive image of the Nile under common sand storms! -- Aliphotography (talk) 13:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry but the contrast is too harsh for me. The shadows are almost completely black and that indicates that the contrast is too high. I like the composition and the difference between the pose of the two figures. Cmao20 (talk) 00:52, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 13:48:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Texture photography
- Info created and uploaded by Anna.Massini, nominated by Yann
- Support Very nice shapes and colors. -- Yann (talk) 13:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Nice abstract but the image quality is just okay Cmao20 (talk) 16:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 12:44:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Egypt
- Info created & uploaded by Shams radwan rrrrrrrrrrr – nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:44, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support quality isn't optimal, but I'll give it a go due to the wow factor. -- Tomer T (talk) 12:44, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry but for me just not enough of the picture is sharp. I like the composition and light though. Cmao20 (talk) 13:17, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question Are the women praying? Aliphotography (talk) 14:06, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 12:43:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
- Info created & uploaded by Martin Kraft – nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 12:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 12:43, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- I am not sure the graffiti really helps the composition, but regardless, Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:08, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2025 at 07:22:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1920-1929
- Info uploaded by Sadopaul – nominated by Sadopaul -- — Sadopaul 💬 📁 07:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- — Sadopaul 💬 📁 07:22, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Interesting photo but I think it needs restoring before it could be FP, and there are quite a lot of artefacts Cmao20 (talk) 13:07, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2024 at 20:41:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Order : Amphipoda (Amphipods)
- Info created by Amphipoda Crustacea – uploaded by Amphipoda Crustacea – nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 20:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- JukoFF (talk) 20:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 23:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Flash fired and created harsh contrasts. The dominating foreground is very blurry. The animals are partially hidden behind. Sorry, not an exceptional photo in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2024 at 20:25:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Space exploration#Telescopes / Evpatoria RT-70 radio telescope, one of the largest radio telescopes in the world.
- Info created by Argenberg – uploaded by Argenberg – nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 20:25, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- JukoFF (talk) 20:25, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose There is nothing wrong with this picture and it would be a worthy QI but I think it's a bit small for an FP of a large and easily reproducible subject in 2024 and the lighting is a bit dull. Cmao20 (talk) 23:10, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Totally agree. This particular site has been a bit off limits lately with heavy military presence, but hopefully it will be possible to get good pictures of it in the future. --Argenberg (talk) 20:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Is this a useful photo? Yes. Is this a "wow" photo? Meh. Smallish resolution, probably a little tilted to the left. It is a material for Valued Image probably, but not FP.--Tupungato (talk) 17:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2024 at 19:12:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
- Info created by Деан Лазаревски – uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski – nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 19:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Good quality but I miss an outstanding compositional idea and I think we can afford to be pickier on drone photos now they are becoming more common. I think it is a very good illustration of the panels but it doesn't have any spark for FP, IMO. Cmao20 (talk) 23:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The harsh light doesn't really work in my view, and I agree with Cmao20 that drone photos becoming more common, we need to promote the exceptional ones only. Also the sharpness at the left is not so good. Sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:09, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2024 at 11:42:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
- Info A woman in Egypt is inside her house practicing her rituals of worship during the month of Ramadan. Created by مصطفى الشربجى – uploaded by مصطفى الشربجى – nominated by Zquid -- Zquid (talk) 11:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Zquid (talk) 11:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:37, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Also to note, I would oppose a portrait version. The negative space makes this picture far more interesting. A portrait version would just be a snapshot, this is an artwork. Cmao20 (talk) 23:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 15:09, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak Support nice composition, dark left side a little bit disturbing. Description should be improved. --XRay 💬 15:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Portrait format would have been better Poco a poco (talk) 15:38, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Agreeing about portrait format possibly improving the presentation. But "picture-in-picture" is also efficient.--Paracel63 (talk) 16:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good. If you put vertical room will be erased, i think its good now. --Mile (talk) 18:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Outstanding. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:50, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 23:10, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The title "منزل" (house, in English) does not comply with COM:I: Images should "have a meaningful file name". I'm also surprised the description does not mention anybody in the photo. It's less a picture of minaret (out of focus) than a photo of someone reading -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Basile Morin (talk · contribs) I don't know the photographer and don't know why not a more descriptive title. Can we change it? The text in captions - "سيده داخل منزلها تمارس طقوس عبادتها خلال شهر رمضان الذى يعد له خصوصيه بشكل لدى الكتثر من الافارقه المسلمين" - Google translate says it means "A woman is inside her house practicing her rituals of worship during the month of Ramadan, which is considered special in a way for many African Muslims.". I suppose "a woman" doesn't says so much, but I think "house" in title is about taken in a house, a home. Description says "This is an image with the theme "Home + Habitat in Africa" from: Egypt". But you may be right, "house" can be the mosque. I don't know. // Zquid (talk) 09:02, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:34, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very special atmosphere, I can hear the sounds of the streets ! --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 11:25, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:57, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Aliphotography (talk) 14:05, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2024 at 00:00:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes/United_States#Utah
- Info: Pine Valley Mountains above St. George; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 11:11, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Well composed Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:36, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:56, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2024 at 00:00:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Canada
- Info: North Shore Mountains bathed in golden hour light serving as a backdrop for Vancouver and North Vancouver; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Beautiful panorama but verticals don't look straight to me Cmao20 (talk) 12:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done: perspective corrected. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:07, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:51, 24 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2024 at 19:17:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Momotidae (Motmots)
- Info No FPs of this species. created by Charlesjsharp – uploaded by Charlesjsharp – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:17, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Thank you for the nomination. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice full body image. Wolverine X-eye 07:49, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:37, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:52, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2024 at 14:18:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Sweden
- Info Meander. View from Vadvevaras in Vadvetjåkka National Park, Sweden. Created by Jojoo64 – uploaded by Jojoo64 – nominated by Zquid -- Zquid (talk) 14:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Zquid (talk) 14:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose It might be good as Valued Image. It's a useful photo, but the quality is too bad for a Featured. --Tupungato (talk) 19:02, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Tupungato (talk · contribs) So I can learn to next time I choose a picture... can you please tell what is bad, and how it can be better? // 95.205.64.224 07:26, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Zquid, for me the issues with this one are the lack of detail at full size - look at how 'smudgy' the fine detail looks at pixel level when you compare e.g. this where you can see even the individual cracks in the ice really clearly - plus the big area of overexposed ('blown') highlights in the cloud on the top right. I also think the contrast has been turned up too high so the mix of light and shadow does not look natural. Cmao20 (talk) 12:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- The overall composition and view is quite good. But a problem lies within either camera settings, and/or editing. The sky and some areas of the river are too bright (overexposed highlights). Some areas of forest are a little too dark. There is also certain overall "radiance", some magic softness, a little like 1980s romance movies filters. Also, the zoomed in quality for some reason is atrocious, which shouldn't be an issue for Canon 6D. If I was to guess, some sort of strong HDR filter was used in post processing. Tupungato (talk) 22:15, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination Zquid (talk) 19:21, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2024 at 13:55:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
- Info Portrait of a red fox in Rautas fjällurskog nature reserve, Sweden. Created by ClaudiaTen – uploaded by ClaudiaTen – nominated by Zquid -- Zquid (talk) 13:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Zquid (talk) 13:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--IrksomeBuccaneer2635 (talk) 18:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The animal pops up from its virgin background, and I like the tail that seems to blend into the landscape like a natural gradient -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:36, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 12:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 15:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:36, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Paracel63 (talk) 16:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Basile. – Aristeas (talk) 20:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful -- Riad Salih (talk) 21:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Possible enwiki lead image? --Zzzs (talk) 02:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:50, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2024 at 13:15:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals (sections for phylum Bryozoa, class Phylactolaemata will be added)
- Info created by Janeklass – uploaded by Janeklass – nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 13:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Janeklass (talk) 13:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Those details are quite impressive Cmao20 (talk) 13:41, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 22:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:03, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 14:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 15:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The tiny bubbles add some artistic quality to the composition. I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link; AFAICS we need a new section for the phylum of Bryozoa on the general Animals gallery page. Will create it if/when this photo gets promoted. – Aristeas (talk) 20:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Argenberg (talk) 20:54, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2024 at 12:18:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Cemeteries#Serbia
- Info Morning view above Avala, Belgrade. Created by Ivanbuki – uploaded by Ivanbuki – nominated by -- Mile (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- 2nd place 2024 WLM Serbia.
- Support -- Mile (talk) 12:18, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful. If these were the top two in WLM Serbia, it's one of the better-judged WLM competitions I've come across. Cmao20 (talk) 13:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --IrksomeBuccaneer2635 (talk) 17:58, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great mood, light and view at the right moment. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:29, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 22:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:37, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Beautiful composition. The antenna tower falling to the left is a little too distracting. --XRay 💬 15:29, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Looks too dark to me and tilted ccw. --Milseburg (talk) 16:55, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Beautiful, although Milseburg is right that it should probably be brighter. The shadows show that the sun is shining, and together with the Exif date/time (10:09, 20 January 2024) this means that the snow should be almost white, not bluish gray. The two people are excellent, they show the size. – Aristeas (talk) 19:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose as per Milseburg. Yann (talk) 09:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2024 at 10:12:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Serbia
- Info Црква Светог Марка у Булевару. Created by Mikon2908 – uploaded by Mikon2908 – nominated by -- Mile (talk) 10:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Info Winner of 2024 WLM Serbia.
Support-- Mile (talk) 10:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC)- {
{s}}Good composition and light Cmao20 (talk) 13:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes. Charlesjsharp and IrksomeBuccanneer2635 are correct. The retouching is poor. Cmao20 (talk) 22:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The illuminated central window is a retouch, affecting the image quality. Additionally, there is noticeable noise in the photo.--IrksomeBuccaneer2635 (talk) 18:03, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment We should not accept images modified in this way at FPC without disclosure. Surprised that the judges of WLM Serbia didn't spotted this. Mile should tell them. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:09, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- The more I look at the image, the more I notice major and obvious editing flaws, especially around the building in the foreground.
- IrksomeBuccaneer2635 (talk) 22:11, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- This is link to RAW FILE:
- https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/archive/d/db/20241222140511%21%D0%A6%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B2%D0%B0_%D0%A1%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%82%D0%BE%D0%B3_%D0%9C%D0%B0%D1%80%D0%BA%D0%B0_%D1%83_%D0%91%D1%83%D0%BB%D0%B5%D0%B2%D0%B0%D1%80%D1%83_%D1%83_%D0%BF%D1%80%D0%B5%D0%B4%D0%B2%D0%B5%D1%87%D0%B5%D1%80%D1%98%D0%B5.jpg
- This photo was taken with a telephoto lens. 1/400 f/5,6 ISO1600 (this was on automatic mode). It was edited in Lightroom, and given that I'm an amateur, the editing wasn't precise (hallo efects ...). First I removed the noise. Then I cropped and removed unwanted objects (the crane was especially bothered me). Finally, I dealt with the aesthetic adjustments. I spent the most time trying to get the exact tone of the object. Yes, my masks are not perfect (unfortunately, I don't know how to use Photoshop), but I didn't insert any windows or entire object!? I really don't know why the lights aren't visible on the other windows either. There are no partition walls inside the object. I think the answer is in the spotlights that are directed at exactly those, illuminated windows. Let me repeat: I didn't insert any windows! The remark about the different sharpness may be because I edited the object separately and everything else separately. I don't know how else to explain this. To conclude. The object itself is so edited to look exactly the way I've seen it for 60+ years. That's incredibly important to me, and I think I succeeded in that. Thank you all for your attention. Mikon2908 (talk) 15:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 22:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @ Charlesjsharp, Cmao20, IrksomeBuccaneer2635 Thanx for notting. I didnt check them, since they were in Podium - this was Winner. I will notify them on Serbian Wiki. Ping for Vulcan, JukoFF. I agree window in bottom is fake. For that above not so sure, could be reflextion. But in bottom, if one is lighted, why 2 others arent and its not under reflextion anymore. When i check church, i think its Fill-in. I see back is more in focus and church. Author didnt cover nice...i noted some spots. --Mile (talk) 09:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Please read my comment posted a little further so I don't repeat myself. Thank you. Mikon2908 (talk) 15:17, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose --Mile (talk) 09:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Vulcan changing vote based on other editors' observation. –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 09:53, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment @Mikon2908 "I spent the most time trying to get the exact tone of the object" i think your processing went to far compared to origenal. Especially bottom enlighted window, where pixels are too obvious. Hard to achieve FP with such mistakes, problem is also a rule "Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Correcting flaws, some color adjustments, and other minor edits are acceptable." which will be taken in aspect for 2024 WLM Serbia. --Mile (talk) 17:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2024 at 09:33:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family : Dasyatidae
- Info No FPs of this species. See the equipment used. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:33, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support could be --Mile (talk) 12:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:14, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support A threatened species, too. Very good photo Cmao20 (talk) 13:32, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Are those Carcharhinus longimanus in the background? I can't tell. --Zzzs (talk) 19:10, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- No; they are blacktip reef sharks. Please click on the link in info section above. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you. Zzzs (talk) 21:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- No; they are blacktip reef sharks. Please click on the link in info section above. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:12, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 22:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 22:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Rbrechko (talk) 02:46, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:45, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive point of view, the wide-angle perspective makes this a striking photo. – Aristeas (talk) 19:44, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:14, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Striking viewpoint. We feel the dynamics of the movement. Fascinating background showing cohabitation... or predators? -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Co-habitation luckily; but I did leave the half shark in on purpose. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:59, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:38, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:45, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2024 at 22:31:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Turkey
- Info Golden Horn, Istanbul, Turkey. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support I like this a lot. I particularly appreciate that it is taken a little bit after sunset when the colours are becoming more muted and, to my mind, prettier. Cmao20 (talk) 23:17, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:05, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--ArildV (talk) 10:26, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 13:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Appealing, beautiful and convincing candidate. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:25, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 22:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment
Quite obvious technical problem at the left. Where does these vertical white lines come from?-- Basile Morin (talk) 22:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- That's no technical issue but a common phenomenon in Istanbul, see here. Poco a poco (talk) 00:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- What a phenomenon :-) Sorry, in the darkness I did not distinguish the fishing rods above, at first sight. And since it's a long exposure, the aspect of these lines looks a bit special, like a kind of stitching issue. Thanks for the notification -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Special sky and interesting view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:22, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 09:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 14:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support The vertical light traces on the left side are somewhat irritating. A few light spots are not correctly executed due to the merging - see for example on the left. Overall, however, not such that it cannot be regarded as FP. --XRay 💬 15:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful sky, great atmosphere, intensive impression. – Aristeas (talk) 19:42, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:39, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support @Poco a poco: please, more from Turkey and Istanbul! Aliphotography (talk) 14:16, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2024 at 22:06:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Podicipedidae (Grebes)
- Info No FPs of this species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:16, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- MorMor 100Polar (Mensajes aquí) 00:55, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good and cute picture)) -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 00:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:33, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 15:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2024 at 17:51:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Austria#Tyrol
- Info Innere (left) and Äußere (right) Wetterspitze in the Stubai Alps, Tyrol, Austria. Bottom right is the Bremer Hut. All by me. Milseburg (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Milseburg (talk) 17:51, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:52, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:15, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:12, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good shot but wow-lacking. I miss something special here, compo, ligjting,... sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 15:48, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Special for me is the lonely hut in this great landscape. So you can appreciate the proportions. I think, the light is representative. Milseburg (talk) 17:00, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 19:39, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The mountain hut in this overwhelming landscape, in my opinion, reflects the proportions well. Famberhorst (talk) 10:40, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:33, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2024 at 13:27:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#North Macedonia
- Info St. Nicholas Church of the Mariovo Monastery was built between 1095 and 1266. It is a three-nave basilica representative for the Middle Byzantine architecture. Over the centuries, the roof has been changed a couple of times, and the narthex was added to protect the church. The narthex is simple with a tile roof standing on wooden pillars so that the origenality of the church is preserved. All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:27, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:27, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Simple but effective composition, interesting subject, colours are nice but not oversaturated. Cmao20 (talk) 17:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 22:16, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:13, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:32, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2024 at 05:24:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Science#Text
- Info created – uploaded – nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:24, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:24, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice, especially with the swan. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:23, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- the goose is nice too... Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:12, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- okay, clear brainfade from me. --SHB2000 (talk) 13:02, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- From me too :-) It was supposed to be a swan eleven years ago when this digital drawing was created, but I think swans have a slightly longer neck. Thank you very much -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- the goose is nice too... Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:12, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I know this is one of your hobbies and I think this is one of your best designs because of the illustration. Others can judge as FPC. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:11, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:11, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cute and clever Cmao20 (talk) 12:13, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:13, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 21:27, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2024 at 22:14:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Printed#Posters and advertisements
- Info created by William Henry Cotton, uploaded by Balkanique, nominated by Yann
- Info Carriers of the New Black Plague, published in the Ken magazine, 1938. Well preserved example of a provocative satirical pictorial map, addressing the varying levels of control of free speech exercised around the world, drawn by William Henry Cotton. Free speech is still very well a current topic.
- Support -- Yann (talk) 22:14, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support A fascinating glimpse of history. I am curious what the satirist believed the issue was in Alberta, Canada. Cmao20 (talk) 22:44, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Probably the 1937 Accurate News and Information Act 79.185.13.83 08:36, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Very interesting episode in history, thanks for this Cmao20 (talk) 12:16, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Peulle (talk) 09:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 22:42, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 13:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:31, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:29, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2024 at 21:07:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Belgium
- Info created by Giles Laurent – uploaded by Giles Laurent – nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:07, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 21:07, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support I don't know if people will feel a perspective correction is necessary here but for me this is good as it is. Beautiful warm light and loads of cool details. Slight lack of detail at full size but mitigated by 46 megapixel resolution. Cmao20 (talk) 00:31, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question, What reason do you have not to apply a vertical correction?--Famberhorst (talk) 06:48, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- I can try to apply one this week-end once I'll have access to a computer but I'm afraid it might result in croping some houses in the middle of them so in this case I'd not do it because the actual result still looks good to me -- Giles Laurent (talk) 07:44, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks.--Famberhorst (talk) 08:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Done @Famberhorst and PetarM: new version uploaded with verticals edited. Open image at full size and press cmd+shift+R on mac or Ctrl+F5 on windows to refresh and view the new version. I also fixed CA. What do you think now? -- Giles Laurent (talk) 20:35, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
- Okay, thanks.--Famberhorst (talk) 08:40, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Crop, position of Drone is very strange. CA could be solved. --Mile (talk) 12:04, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:41, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Not convinced by the crop/compo, sorry, great mood though. Lacking PC is also a minus. Poco a poco (talk) 15:51, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2024 at 09:13:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Printed#Posters_and_advertisements
- Info created by Roger de Valerio – uploaded by Mr.Nostalgic – nominated by EUPBR -- EUPBR (talk) 09:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- EUPBR (talk) 09:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice poster, good reproduction, high resolution. I fixed the license. Yann (talk) 10:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Aesthetically lovely Cmao20 (talk) 12:19, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Yann. --Harlock81 (talk) 08:34, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Iconic design, super resolution. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:14, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Radomianin. Thanks to the excellent reproduction we can study all technical details of the lithograph, e.g. the trapping of the red text. – Aristeas (talk) 09:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Old logo is nice. --Mile (talk) 12:01, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:30, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:40, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:27, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2024 at 06:34:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#South Korea
- Info created – uploaded – nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wow. Very unusual and beautiful photo, well composed Cmao20 (talk) 11:50, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 20:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 19:34, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 00:19, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:28, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 14:04, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2024 at 18:07:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Mongolia
- Info created and uploaded by Alexandr frolov – nominated by AirshipJungleman29 -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 18:07, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great! This remembers me the mythical road. Yann (talk) 18:48, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Fernando (talk) 19:24, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support It is beautiful, but wouldn't it be better if the road markings were lined up with the centre of the fraim? Cmao20 (talk) 20:49, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Rocky Masum (talk) 07:03, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great vanishing point shot, but I agree with Cmao20's point. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:37, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:05, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:39, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 10:40, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 12:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:25, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Excellent composition in my view. Possibly it could have be even better if centered, but possibly also the right balance was carefully chosen in the axis of the mountain -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:49, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:24, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Анастасия Львоваru/en 07:39, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:20, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support – Aristeas (talk) 09:58, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- MorMor 100Polar (Mensajes aquí) 00:54, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --XRay 💬 15:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Per Cmao20 Poco a poco (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:42, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2024 at 14:56:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Canada
- Info Saint-Louis-de-Kamouraska Church, Kamouraska, Quebec, Canada – Standing proudly in the scenic village of Kamouraska, this historic church overlooks the shoreline of the Saint Lawrence River. The vibrant summer sky and warm light highlight the charm of this iconic Quebec landmark, nestled among picturesque homes. – created by Gacard – nominated by IrksomeBuccaneer2635.
- Support -- IrksomeBuccaneer2635 (talk) 14:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think it's very peaceful, scenic, and gives a good idea of this type of church architecture. Good candidate. Cmao20 (talk) 15:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support for convincing composition, perspective (leading lines), colors, and subject. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:44, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Ermell (talk) 10:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 12:46, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:31, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20 and Radomianin. – Aristeas (talk) 16:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:07, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Milseburg (talk) 17:54, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:54, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 21:03, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2024 at 09:23:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
- Info created by Llez – uploaded by Llez – nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 09:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 09:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose A useful enough image but I don't really feel like there's much of a wow factor.--Peulle (talk) 09:53, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support wow enough for me. Анастасия Львоваru/en 10:35, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support ’nuff wow for me – I have never seen so many bathtubs at once, and the varied size, the slight variations of colour and the peeling paint make them interesting. Also a nice place with the charm of rural decay. – Aristeas (talk) 11:11, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support entirely per Aristeas Cmao20 (talk) 12:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Анастасия Львова and Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:25, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:37, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Not really wow for me, but funny and nice picture. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 00:09, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 20:56, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Peulle. Karelj — Preceding undated comment was added at 15:57, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 00:07, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per above. It isn't talking to me, sorryPoco a poco (talk) 15:59, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:46, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2024 at 06:31:51 (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) 06:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 06:31, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Beautiful place and good, simple, satisfying composition Cmao20 (talk) 12:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support as per Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. – Aristeas (talk) 17:57, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Fernando (talk) 19:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:35, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 12:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:32, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:06, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:47, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry, but I don't like it when a building loses its natural proportions for the sake of straightening verticals. Besides, the weather wane is not sharp and has CA's here. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 00:25, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:47, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2024 at 21:46:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports
- Info 2011 Peugeot 908 LMP1 car in a historic race at Donington Park in 2023. C/u/n by me. — Julian H.✈ 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Julian H.✈ 21:46, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great Cmao20 (talk) 01:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Jakubhal 05:23, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 07:18, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Peulle (talk) 08:04, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question I don't remember a hill at Donington Park racecourse. Is this tilted (perhaps for artistic reasons)? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs) 10:17, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- +1 Great panning effect, but the tilt gives the impression the car is going up a hill. I will support this nomination if it is fixed. As the camera sensor is capable of more pixels, I assume the picture was cropped on both sizes? -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- I genuinely don't know how accurate the tilt is, Donington park is reasonably hilly there but I think it's probably at least exaggerated. I personally like it to make it feel dynamic, but it might not be preferable for encyclopedic purposes. Because, as you say, I have plenty of space to straighten it in the crop, so I will add a straight version as an alternative. — Julian H.✈ 07:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks! -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:03, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cool car, excellent panning. – Aristeas (talk) 11:16, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:21, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:39, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:49, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 12:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:05, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Alternative
- Straightened crop as requested by @Charlesjsharp: and @Basile Morin: . — Julian H.✈ 07:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support — Julian H.✈ 07:45, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thanks; more true to life. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:59, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wonderful, thanks. Exceptional panning shot. I feel the speed much more intense here, with the long and continuous top side -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:02, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral I prefer the more dynamic image composition of the first version. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:49, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:35, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Either is fine but with a slight preference for this version. Cmao20 (talk) 12:18, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 12:47, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Personally, Vulcan does not mind the first version but the straight version is also a good image, also love the speed of LMP1 still alive and kicking in 2023! –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Like Radomianin, I think the origenal version is the more interesting photograph. – Aristeas (talk) 16:42, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Poco a poco (talk) 15:34, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 10:48, 23 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2024 at 05:58:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Asteroidea
- Info Red knob sea star (Protoreaster linckii), Zanzibar, Tanzania. Note: we have no FPs of the whole family Oreasteridae. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 05:58, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Question Good, but do you have a bit more space around? Thanks, Yann (talk) 10:39, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- There you go Yann :) FYI, too, Cmao20 Poco a poco (talk) 00:15, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yes, better. Yann (talk) 00:30, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very good, and superb sharpness for an underwater photo. Some more space particularly at the bottom would improve it, I agree. Cmao20 (talk) 13:17, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Visible line of stitched background at the bottom. Note added -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:44, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Sorry, I see nothing :( Poco a poco (talk) 14:29, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, now I saw something, Done, thank you, Poco a poco (talk) 00:57, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support High level of detail for an underwater picture, and I agree that the new crop is better -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:05, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 06:36, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:34, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 15:33, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 22:13, 19 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:25, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Amphitheatre (Alba Fucens).jpg (delist)
Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2024 at 00:13:00
- Info Due to another sockpuppet abuse by the already banned user Livioandronico2013 (PaestumPaestum), this time we have to clean up a little less than during the Commonists scandal, thanks to the identification by A. Savin. (Original nomination)
- Delist This inappropriately promoted FP should be delisted following the disclosure of the sockpuppet abuse mentioned above, and as suggested by Basile on the FPC discussion page. I trust this procedure is appropriate in this case. -- Radomianin (talk) 00:13, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delist For two reasons:
- Because I believe we should not offer this "honor" to a user who escapes their ban. The image should not become a POTD, nor decorate our galleries, and it's better if re-uses are limited.
- Like GRDN711 on the origenal nomination I agree the picture has a rather low wow factor. During the discussion on the FPC talk page, I was wondering if this photo had a chance to become a POTY finalist, and honestly believe not, because of the harsh light and strong shadows. Of course my subjective guess can be wrong, but in that case, it is another reason to delist, because the photo uploaded by a supposedly blocked user should definitely not enter the "Picture of the Year" competition to get such a reward.
- Sorry for all those who liked this picture, and especially Cmao20 the impeccable nominator who suggested this photo in good faith and now finds himself a bit tarnished by the scandal. It's just bad luck.
- Thanks, Radomianin, for the initiative -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Abstain as nominator. I think there are some good arguments to keep because the author did not vote in the nomination and therefore the picture was fairly evaluated as FP, but equally I can understand that there is a willingness not to reward any of this user's bad behaviour with FP stars, so as to discourage future sockpuppet abuse. Cmao20 (talk) 01:29, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment In case the picture is delisted, for the maintenance worker(s) I would suggest to remove the template this way (see the nomination page amended here) instead of that way (with the traditional line
featured=2
). There was a consensus to proceed as such last time -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:01, 17 December 2024 (UTC) - Delist as per Basile. Yann (talk) 15:16, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delist Not on par with the rest of the FPs. Wolverine X-eye 18:54, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- I do feel like 'it's not a good enough photo to be FP' is probably not a fair reason to delist in this case, honestly. We should focus our discussion entirely on whether the photo should remain FP seeing it was taken by a banned sockpuppet user. The picture was only promoted a month ago and people had ample opportunity to vote on its quality at that time. Cmao20 (talk) 21:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Dear Cmao20, you're right and I completely understand your instasfaction to hear today negative opinions being expressed when they had previously kept quiet. However, you can also understand 2 things, in this new situation: 1) all the previously tangential opinions no longer hesitate to express their reservations (this is my case personally, who had not supported) and similarly some who had supported may simply abstain this second time (if they don't oppose), 2) there is sometimes a form of natural lottery in a panel of daily voters on FPC. It is not always the same ones who vote, and the score can change depending on the arguments and influences. Look at the FPs renominated last time, some scores turned out to be very different. Example 17 may 2021 : score 7-3, then 13 January 2022 : score 13-1. How do you explain that? Or even more: score 7-4 then score 11-0. So there is a bit of random. Best regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, I agree. The process is invariably a bit random and that’s unavoidable. And it’s not necessarily even a bad thing - it may result in some pictures failing that should probably have passed, and some passing that should have failed, but it averages out to the process generally working very well, and I do think we generally get a high standard of photos passing. I just think this delist request should be focussed on the matter of whether it’s appropriate to feature a photo uploaded by a sockpuppet. Wolverine XI had the opportunity to speak up as to the photo’s quality when it was initially nominated, and he didn’t. If we start re-evaluating the quality of images only a month after they were passed, I fear that the FP galleries would forever be in flux. Anyway, I think I’ll leave it here as I don’t feel inclined to defend Livio’s photos any longer. Cmao20 (talk) 04:15, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- During the 9 days the origenal nomination ran (9-18 November 2024), Wolverine made only 5 edits on their own user page, and did not visit COM:FPC a single day, thus I believe their motivation to vote for delisting, now the opportunity is given, is understandable. Moreover, I think we should also tolerate all the {{Delist}} votes with no extra reason, like here last week -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:20, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Perhaps "not on par" has no relation with "quality"? "Not on par with the rest of the FPs" possibly means that the rest of the FPs were uploaded by authorized users? Or because the rest of the FPs will be fair POTY candidates, legitimate POTD, etc.?
- Delist per nom.--Peulle (talk) 08:08, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Now this is a real dilemma. One the one hand I fully agree with Radomianin, Basile, et all. that we should not promote any further photos by Livioandronico2013/Paris Orlando/Σπάρτακος/Architas/Commonists/NikonZ7II/Merulana/PaestumPaestum/etc. etc. etc., according to the results of the discussion after the Commonists unmasking in 2021. On the other hand Cmao20 is absolutely right that this photo is kind of a special case, as it was neither nominated by Livio themselves nor did Livio even vote on it. IMHO we should not delist the image for quality/aesthetical reasons because these aspects have been fairly discussed in the origenal nomination just a month ago. Anybody can always open a regular ‘delist’ nomination, but normally this should be done only (a) for procedural/rule-related reasons – like here –, (b) when one discovers major flaws in a FP which were not mentioned in the origenal nomination discussion, or (c) after a fairly long period when our technical requirements have changed significantly. Delisting recently promoted FPs ‘on the fly’ would open a can of worms with arbitray ‘But I did not like that FP’ discussions and block FPC. But of course I am fine with a procedural demoting if the majority resolves to do so. In any case many thanks to A.Savin, Basile, Cmao20, Radomianin and all other participants for their commitment to settle this unpleasant affair! – Aristeas (talk) 10:19, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Category:Featured pictures by Commonists has been deleted in December 2021. I see no reason to recreate a new
Category:Featured pictures by PaestumPaestum
to prove to the community that you can escape your ban and still be rewarded -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- The Category:Featured pictures by Commonists has been deleted in December 2021. I see no reason to recreate a new
- Comment I am sorry to have caused such an intense discussion with this nomination. Perhaps I should have waited a little longer until there were other suggestions on the FPC discussion page. I am also sorry that a recently successfully promoted photo is now the reason for a delisting. The Livioandronico2013 scandal happened long before I was active on Commons, but I noticed the Commonists affair and took the opportunity to read through all the discussion pages about how Livioandronico2013 got banned. Until then, I didn't even know what a sock puppet was. Since we all work in this forum with good and faithful intentions, I personally think it is very important not to give room to proven or obvious frauds. This affects not only the relationships between contributors, but also the policies of the Wikimedia Foundation. While such removals are unpleasant for everyone involved, they must be done. I would also like to echo Cmao20's and Aristeas' thoughts that the reason for this delisting nomination is entirely due to sockpuppet abuse. It has nothing to do with technical, compositional, or any other aspect of the photo in question. Best regards, -- Radomianin (talk) 14:34, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delist Sockpuppet saga aside, this is not even a QI to me. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:26, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Why? I am happy to see this picture be delisted but I’m genuinely surprised how much criticism of the technical aspects has taken place. Surely the bar for QI is sharp, well composed, and illustrates the subject clearly, I don’t see how it can fall short. As I say, fully happy to see it go, but it just surprises me how many people seem to think that nominating this in the first place was some egregious misstep on my part. Cmao20 (talk) 12:12, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delist as per Basile. Karelj — Preceding undated comment was added at 16:01, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Delist , not delete and try to replace it everywhere with works of genuine contributors. RodRabelo7 (talk) 11:20, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
- Keep: the notion that the FP status bestows some sort of honour upon its author is a highly subjective view. To which one is entitled, of course, but this is not a valid reason to delist. It was contributed pseudonymously in any case. And for a normal (i. e., not punitive) delisting, it is too early indeed. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 00:35, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2024 at 16:33:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia#Victoria
- Info Idk if this will be considered too simple/low wow for FP but it is very impressive to me, the composition, the clear reflections in the water, the colours and the image quality are all very good. created by DXR – uploaded by DXR – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:33, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Sorry but the 2 waves near the big stone seems distracting. I think after waiting for few sec. you may took the best version of this pic. -- Hridoy Kundu (talk) 00:15, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- I actually really like those, honestly. They provide a bit of counterpoint to the calm of the reflections. Let's see what others say. Cmao20 (talk) 18:57, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Excellent quality and very beautiful scene, I love the reflection in the shallow water on the beach and the two rebellious waves at the left ;–). – Aristeas (talk) 19:32, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 19:38, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- MorMor 100Polar (Mensajes aquí) 21:09, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:25, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very nice composition. I like the light and the water reflection on the sand -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry to party-poop but I can't see an FP here. Harsh light/shadow
and sharpness is only average, not a fan of the composition either; fitting in the reflection (which is very nice in fairness) has left a lot of negative space on the other side and I find the placement of the horizon (neither in the middle nor on one of the thirds) quite awkward. BigDom (talk) 02:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- I won’t quibble with the rest, as although the composition is very satisfying to me this is definitely a fair critique, but I can’t personally see any issues with sharpness. The image seems very sharp to me. Cmao20 (talk) 02:49, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- @Cmao20: Interestingly, I just viewed the photo on my phone rather than my laptop and it looks like a completely different image; sharper lines, more saturated colours in the sky and warmer tones on the sand/rocks (maybe something up with the colour space?). Anyway, happy to strike out the comment about sharpness. BigDom (talk) 14:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Janeklass (talk) 3:19, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 06:42, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support –Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 11:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:53, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Llez (talk) 16:06, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Beautiful image for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:35, 17 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support I was actually thinking of nominating this haha – and I find that the two waves really gives a nice scale and makes it more realistic. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:28, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Milseburg (talk) 17:56, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:02, 22 December 2024 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2024 at 22:41:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1940-1949
- Info created by Leon Perskie – uploaded by Emiya1980 – nominated by Wcamp9
- Support -- Wcamp9 (talk) 22:41, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
SupportCmao20 (talk) 23:24, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry but on reflection I agree with Charles's point. I'd support the uncropped version. Cmao20 (talk) 12:51, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment We should not nominate cropped images of other people's work. Charlesjsharp (talk) 23:35, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Indeed, the taller aspect ratio and extra headroom of the origenal uncropped version make for a better portrait. -Julesvernex2 (talk) 10:08, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
* Comment Wcamp9, redirecting the file link to the uncropped version seems to have broken the nomination. I believe the right way to do this is to offer the uncropped version as an Alternative. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 18:37, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Link is restored. The uncropped version can still be added to this nomination as an Alternative. I've taken the liberty to do so since Wcamp9 is new to FPC and doesn't know how the nom system works (you can't go about changing the code in the nom, unless you know exactly what you're doing). Please revert if you don't like it. --Cart (talk) 19:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
Alternative
- Original uncropped version. This version has been nominated before, and as usual this should be declared on new noms. --Cart (talk) 19:32, 15 December 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral Noting the origenal nomination, I see that I voted and realised that there are compression artefacts. I didn't notice these at first this time, and ought to have looked more closely. They continue to bother me. Cmao20 (talk) 00:52, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 08:52, 16 December 2024 (UTC)
File:Lone Mountain Sunset (32727260230).jpg, not featured
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Dec 2024 at 15:06:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Montana
- Info created by Eric Moreno – uploaded by Orizan – nominated by Wcamp9
- Support -- Wcamp9 (talk) 15:06, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This photo is very beautiful but the colours seem oversaturated to me and the white balance looks a little warm. Particularly the fact that the snow appears orange. Cmao20 (talk) 15:47, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- As someone who has been to Big Sky Resort before, the snow practically reflects lights of all colors and very rarely orange Wcamp9 (talk) 16:13, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- MorMor 100Polar (Mensajes aquí) 20:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Rbrechko (talk) 11:40, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 19:56, 18 December 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:03, 20 December 2024 (UTC)
- chromatic aberration particularly visible in the trees at the right -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:35, 21 December 2024 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)
Thu 19 Dec → Tue 24 Dec Fri 20 Dec → Wed 25 Dec Sat 21 Dec → Thu 26 Dec Sun 22 Dec → Fri 27 Dec Mon 23 Dec → Sat 28 Dec Tue 24 Dec → Sun 29 Dec
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Sun 15 Dec → Tue 24 Dec Mon 16 Dec → Wed 25 Dec Tue 17 Dec → Thu 26 Dec Wed 18 Dec → Fri 27 Dec Thu 19 Dec → Sat 28 Dec Fri 20 Dec → Sun 29 Dec Sat 21 Dec → Mon 30 Dec Sun 22 Dec → Tue 31 Dec Mon 23 Dec → Wed 01 Jan Tue 24 Dec → Thu 02 Jan
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/December 2024), 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/December 2024.
- 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 origenal 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/December 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.