Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list

Nominations

Due to recent changes in the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures are only working on this page if you have Javascript enabled. If you do not have Javascript enabled please manually sign with --[[User:yourname|yourname]] 22:54, 5 May 2008 (UTC)

July 14, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: Stupa That Chomsi in Luang Prabang (Laos).--Ondřej Žváček 07:36, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

July 13, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: Mumford Hall, University of Illinois. --Dschwen 03:51, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Quarter "Venezia Nuova, Livorno, Italy --Lucarelli 01:07, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Machu Picchu, Peru. Residential section. Blur on the foreground was on purpose ;) --XtoF 22:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Colmberg, Bavaria, Germany --Simonizer 21:34, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: The Wishes fireworks at Walt Disney World. --Bdesham 20:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: The Reflections of Earth fireworks at Walt Disney World. --Bdesham 16:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: View from the Emmental to the Schrattenfluh, Switzerland --Simonizer 14:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination View from The Remarkables near Queenstown / New Zealand. Chmehl 12:21, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion Great picture --Simonizer 22:08, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Ruined Mitriūnai manor palace in Lithuania. Juliux 09:03, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination Juan Carlos, King of Spain. -- א (Aleph) 8:06, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion Absolutely gorgeous shot! --Specious 08:13, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Puppy chilling in arboretum --Specious 05:24, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

July 12, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: cherrytrees, Birkenreuth, Germany --Simonizer 20:31, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Castle Abenberg, Abenberg, Germany --Simonizer 19:35, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review Are there birds in the sky? Especially left from the tower? --Berthold Werner 14:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Abenberg, Germany --Simonizer 18:14, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Castle Abenberg, Abenberg, Germany --Simonizer 17:59, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination Germany, Rothenburg ob der Tauber, Herrngasse --Berthold Werner 17:52, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Decline Not sharp (especially left side). Lycaon 06:57, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Lake Zug, Switzerland --Simonizer 17:06, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion Nice. -- MJJR 20:42, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Building at UNC-CH --Specious 04:48, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

July 11, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: Siena, Italy --Massimo Catarinella 22:14, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• * Nomination: Dolycoris baccarum nymphs and eggs --Böhringer 20:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC) * * Review needed
  • Nomination: Dolycoris baccarum nymphs and eggs --Böhringer 20:56, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Pot with handle. #!George Shuklin 20:35, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Germany, Rothenburg o. d. T., Burgtor (Castle Gate) --Berthold Werner 12:30, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Benches in the dam of Amsterdam showing the symbol of the city --Wuzur 09:08, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Dortmund, Germany, cemetery «Ostfriedhof», sculpture on the grave of family Klönne --Mbdortmund 12:20, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

July 10, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: Larva of Harmonia axyridis --Böhringer 19:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)(UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Anguis fragilis (O Grove, Galicia) --Lmbuga 17:39, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Wideangle view from TotR, including lower observation decks. --Dschwen 16:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review Why is there so much noise in the shadows, especially towards the bottom of the picture? Thegreenj 15:25, 12 July 2008 (UTC), because I lifted the shadows down there. Feel free to downsample from the original 24 Megapixels to 2 or 4 Megapixels for your review. --Dschwen 19:20, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

July 09, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: Ingooigem (Belgium): detail of the house of the Flemish writer Stijn Streuvels. -- MJJR 20:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Namur (Belgium): St Aubain cathedral. -- MJJR 20:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination Namur (Belgium): main watch-post of the Citadel. -- MJJR 20:17, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Simonizer 22:11, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Germany, Rothenburg o. d. T., Galgentor (Gibbet gate) --Berthold Werner 12:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review  Comment The tower seems to be leaning to the right. –Dilaudid 17:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
    Corrected (0.4° anticlockwise) --Berthold Werner 07:50, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Alex G. Spanos Stadium at Cal Poly, San Luis Obispo, California (fixed post processing). Basar 02:42, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Boathouse on The Lake, Central Park, New York City. --Dschwen 00:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

July 08, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: Coney Island beach at sunset. --Dschwen 23:59, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

  ‎
• 
  • Nomination: Namur (Belgium): one of the gates of the Citadelle. -- MJJR 20:52, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Ingooigem (West Flanders, Belgium): the countryside and the slopes of the Tiegemberg hill. -- MJJR 20:52, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Sympetrum striolatum --Butko 11:50, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review As Carol supposed the last time you nominated the image, it would be a good idea to give your pics a more descriptive name... --LC-de 12:44, 8 July 2008 (UTC) I rename image --Butko 06:58, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

July 07, 2008

• 
  • Nomination: Agapornis roseicollis (Vieillot, 1818) and Agapornis fischeri (Reichenow, 1887) in the zoo of Wrocław (Poland) --Guérin Nicolas 23:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review  Comment Please only nominate a small number of photographs at one time. Also please geotag your images. --Dilaudid 05:11, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
    Sorry this is my first time, i added geocoding on all of them. Guérin Nicolas 07:35, 8 July 2008 (UTC) Thanks! :) --Dilaudid 16:08, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Caligo memnon (C. & R. Felder, 1866) in the zoo of Wrocław (Poland) --Guérin Nicolas 23:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Morpho achilles (Linnaeus ,1758) in the zoo of Wrocław (Poland) --Guérin Nicolas 23:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Hydrosaurus amboinensis (Schlosser, 1768) in the zoo of Wrocław (Poland) --Guérin Nicolas 23:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination Xenentodon cancila (Hamilton, 1822) in the zoo of Wrocław (Poland) --Guérin Nicolas 23:04, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Decline Too noisy. Lycaon 07:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Parthenos sylvia (Cramer, 1775) in the zoo of Wrocław (Poland) --Guérin Nicolas 22:51, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination Huy (Belgium), town hall -- MJJR 20:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Decline Too tight crop on the sides, sorry. –Dilaudid 17:51, 13 July 2008 (UTC) -- The main subject is completely visible and not too tight cropped IMO; the surrounding (and cropped out) buildings don't add a surplus value. -- MJJR 20:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Huy (Belgium), old Fort -- MJJR 20:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Namur (Belgium), the Pont de Jambes on the Meuse river -- MJJR 20:35, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination European Common Frog (Rana temporaria)-- --Richard Bartz 14:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion OK --Simonizer 23:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Statue of Saint Joseph in Amiens Cathedral.Vassil 09:18, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

July 06, 2008

• 
  • Nomination Academy House, Turku, Finland. --Dilaudid 16:45, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI quality --Massimo Catarinella 14:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Restoration on the steps of Altes Museum in Berlin. --Dschwen 15:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --Massimo Catarinella 14:38, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Eye of Lactoria cornuta (Longhorn cowfish) in Sala Humboldt of Aquarium Finisterrae -- Drow male 14:12, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review needed

July 04,2008

• 
  • Nomination: Apple box leaf and flower cluster. This is more than 2 000 000px. Benjamint 10:27, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review 1.91 Megapixel. --Dschwen 23:25, 5 July 2008 (UTC) I get 2,007,440px... ? Okay, just checked the archive re:1024 squared is 1MP, (Ithink that is rediculous, it's like saying a GB is 1024 mb not 1,000), however, I'm happy to go by that from now on even though en wiki says: "A megapixel is 1 million pixels" Benjamint444 12:41, 7 July 2008 (UTC), You are missing the point, the 2MP are the bare minimum. If you unnecessarily downscale because you don't want to share larger sizes, that's fine, but don't expect a QI tag in this case. --Dschwen 13:03, 7 July 2008 (UTC)So your saying you would oppose them even if they were above the 2MP requirement, you almost sound as if you would just oppose anything I nominate no matter how good even if it's above the size requirements just because it may have been downsampled? Does that not sound a bit distorted to you, blanket opposing a user.Benjamint444 03:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Lasiommata maera, a female Large Wall Brown, Eisacktal, South Tyrol, Italy --Hsuepfle 22:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion Please provide Exif-Data and where (in which region might be okay) the photograph was taken! Please categorize!-- א 13:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
    Region and category is added although I prefer secies pages. Exif data is lost during cropping. Since when is Exif data required or is it only nice to have? --Hsuepfle 20:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
    Looks good. Exif is only nice to have. Thegreenj 14:16, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Polyommatus semiargus, a male Mazarine Blue, Eisacktal, South Tyrol, Italy, --Hsuepfle 22:23, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Review Please provide Exif-Data and where (in which region might be okay) the photograph was taken! Please categorize better!-- א 13:01, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
    Region and category is added. Exif data is lost during cropping. --Hsuepfle 20:41, 6 July 2008 (UTC)

July 02,2008

• 
  • Nomination Rentilly castle, Rentilly, France --Sanchezn 19:47, 2 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Promotion Very well done --Massimo Catarinella 16:07, 3 July 2008 (UTC)

Consensual review

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

• To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.

• You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons.

• The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision - Promoted or Not promoted - will be registered at the end of the text and then executed, according to the Guidelines.

Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.

Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted

• In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the image will stay in Consensual Review for a maximum period of 8 days, counted from its entry.
• Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add  Oppose and  Support if necessary.
• Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
• Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".
  

Images

Image:250cc GP Catalunya 2008.jpg

• Nomination 250 cc motorcycle Grand Prix at Circuit de Catalunya --Pedroserafin 09:23, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion  Oppose to me its out of focus, the composition of the bikes could to be closer together. Also is it possible for the riders be identified. Gnangarra 12:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC) (Unless you really wanted to discuss this) -- carol 15:39, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:NYC_Trinity_Church.jpg

• Nomination Trinity Church, New York City. --Dschwen 01:07, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion Why not correcting perspective distortion here? --Sfu 08:10, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  To much to correct and make it look natural, plus it has this looking up (to god) look. --Dschwen 12:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  Two point perspective works well here. Thegreenj 13:56, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
  There is a slight (0.3°) CW tilt. Not enough to oppose, but still. I agree with Thegreenj on the perspective here, though. Lycaon 07:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC), "Not enough to oppose" but you still switch to discuss? --Dschwen 03:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
  Yep, so that I can fully support when fixed. ;-). Lycaon 06:06, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Bishop's Peak3.jpg

• Nomination Bishop Peak in San Luis Obispo, California. Basar 22:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Comment (At least) Two dust spots and the edges need cropping. -- carol 11:43, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment I think those little black things are Turkey Vultures which is why I didn't patch them over; we have a lot of them there; I could remove them anyway. Which edges do you think need cropping? Basar 16:33, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Both of the vertical edges had extra stuff on them. The little black spots are not what I was talking about. I originally thought that the spots I was seeing mostly in sky photographs was clone tool mark. I have seen evidence that it is probably dust spots on the lens. I saw a few areas in the sky of this image which have that quality to it. A dust spot on the lens would diffuse the light it was collecting from a distance. A clone tool could also make the same effect. -- carol (talk) 05:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

I understand now. I fixed them, although I could only find one dust spot. Basar 06:22, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Good photograph of one of California's two seasons. -- carol (talk) 06:29, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose To unsharp, lacking detail. Lycaon 18:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • By 'too unsharp' do you mean I applied the unsharp filter too much? That may be as I did put it on the strong side of what I thought looked good. Also, did you mean to imply a causal relationship with lacking detail? Basar 21:07, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
    • I can tell you this, from my point of view, I do not know if I have ever seen this particular pile of dirt or not -- but when looking at these things here, the amount of sharpness in this photograph is what I have seen. These crazy piles of dirt; they are green in the winter months and brown during all of the other months. Close up, the plants and tree that grow on these piles of dirt are also unsharp -- hard to the touch but unsharp in appearance. -- carol (talk) 04:50, 14 July 2008 (UTC)
• There is a little white line at the upper portion on the right side of this image -- clone tool can fix it but it is a sloppy crop problem. -- carol (talk) 04:52, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   Lycaon 18:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:NYC_TotR_Queens.jpg

• Nomination Citigroup Center and view across Queens, high res. --Dschwen 15:28, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Oppose The sky is way too noisy. --Massimo Catarinella 13:18, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
• The editorial value of an extremely noisy sky when viewed from RCenter is worth mentioning here. The dust spots don't lend to the editorial though.... -- carol 11:34, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support What!? Whatever little amount of noise is in the sky is far offset by the resolution. And what dust spots? I'm sure they're there, but that's quibbling... Thegreenj 00:04, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment You call that carpet of haze a little amount of noise..? And I do see some dust spots, but they are neglectable in my opinion. He could stop by the nearest camera shop and let his camera being cleaned to avoid this in the future. --Massimo Catarinella 00:35, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
  • Haze and noise are two totally different things. Haze is inevitable in an urban environment like this. Noise has nothing to do with it. Thegreenj 04:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support most major urban environments will an occurrence of haze though an unwanted part of the environment Gnangarra 13:52, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   Lycaon 18:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Apricots real.jpg

• Nomination Apricots, beautiful in their non-uniform real appearance. -- carol 05:14, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Oppose Unsharp, too shallow DOF. –Dilaudid 17:23, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment If they were "sharp" they would be "nectarines". -- carol 19:37, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose good composition but spoilt by rather an unfortunate choice of fruit Gnangarra 13:48, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   Lycaon 18:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Turun tuomiokirkko.jpg

• Nomination Cathedral of Turku. --Dilaudid 12:39, 8 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Comment A huge spot in this image. -- carol 12:07, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support I dont see a spot, Gnangarra 13:46, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• On the right side, about one third the distance between the cloud and the upper edge of the photograph. It is easier to see these things in a darkened room. -- carol (talk) 15:36, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   Lycaon 18:44, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Rothenburg BW 4.JPG

• Nomination Rothenburg ob der Tauber, Germany --Berthold Werner 15:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Support Good exposure. --Dschwen 15:29, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose bad HDR stitching --Lestath 13:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

Could you circle the problems you see? They did this for seam errors in panos for a while a few months ago, it was very educational to me. -- carol (talk) 05:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Support can't see something "bad" --Simonizer 19:40, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support -- MJJR 20:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Rather severe CA problems (e.g. tower has a magenta lining on the right side and a green one on the left side). Lycaon 07:12, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
• That I saw. I am still curious about the "HDR" and the "stitching" and the "bad HDR stitching". -- carol (talk) 08:26, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

• That I didn't see neither. Lycaon 08:25, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Oppose considerable color issues on building edges I can see green, magenta or blue edging look at guttering and roof lines of all buildings. Gnangarra 13:42, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Chromatic aberration --Massimo Catarinella 14:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   Lycaon 18:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Baumweissling

• Nomination Baumweissling (Aporia crataegi) --Richard Bartz 13:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Oppose Insects ruin this perfectly good photograph of a flower. -- carol 02:09, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support This is a weird assessment. The butterflies are the main topic of this images. I would promote as QI. Estrilda 16:13, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful image, I also support promoting as QI. Chmehl 18:15, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Flower ruins this perfectly good photograph of a flower :-) Thegreenj 19:34, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support The insects and the flower ruin this perfectly good photograph of blurred grass. –Dilaudid 07:54, 11 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Willkommen im Teletubbieland! --Mbdortmund 01:19, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promote?   carol (talk) 07:10, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Baumweissling Aporia crataegi 2.jpg

• Nomination Baumweissling (Aporia crataegi) --Richard Bartz 13:40, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
• I can't put a QI stamp on this one, Richard. At low res it looks perfect, but on close inspection it to clearly reveals the partial noise reduction that you applied. Lycaon 14:36, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment Fixed --Richard Bartz 15:31, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 0  support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose  -> (votes?) -- carol (talk) 07:09, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:UIUC_Mumford_Hall.jpg with vaccation-value enhancement

• Nomination Mumford Hall, University of Illinois. --Dschwen 15:39, 6 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Oppose I very much dislike the composition and the building appears to be tilted, sorry.--Massimo Catarinella 16:57, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Comment IMO it is not tilted. And if the oppose reason amounts to something as fuzzy as disliking the composition then I'd prefer some more opinions (even if it gets rejected anyways) --Dschwen 17:28, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Neutral It is not tilted. It has a perspective that I don't like, but technically it is QI, but because of the 'not like' part I'll refrain from voting. I'm sure someone will support... Lycaon 19:14, 7 July 2008 (UTC)
• While it could be argued that none of the dust spots are worth repairing, I found several (and marked) that I would not have downloaded and marked without the more obvious ones. Not found in this image was UFO landing sign in the clouds (I looked carefully). Are all little blurry dark spots in images going to be birds now? The stitching is nice, however, I also suggested a cropline. -- carol (talk) 11:20, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Info uploaded an edit. Sensor dust removed, perspective corrected using hugin, cropped the beautiful clouds (sigh ;-) ). --Dschwen 14:52, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
• It was a nice sky, maybe put the statue of liberty behind it? -- carol (talk) 17:05, 9 July 2008 (UTC)

   Support Eh, I forgot to vote. Technically the original has fallen into "decline", I am not certain what to do with the number of days and the new upload. And, additionally, I slept through when the nit-picky closure occurred. Now that we are all seemingly non-productive nit-pickers what to do about this? -- carol 04:49, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

  withdraw this one, and nominate the edit for a fresh start? --Dschwen 12:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

I have had every single thing I have done which was not to an image or a category questioned and the absolute worst assumed and without asking the people it was done to first for so long now -- It seems really stupid to do that with this image, it is ready to leave the page now. I am going to vote favorably for it, with the great wish that others who only have rules, assumptions of badness and little else to communicate will also drop in, vote favorably for it so it can get the hell off the QI page and make room for more -- carol 13:18, 10 July 2008 (UTC)

•  Support Certainly meets QI requirements. Chmehl 14:20, 10 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose Please renominate a version to end this confusion. Lycaon 07:14, 13 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose This did little to help with the problem. -- carol (talk) 11:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   carol (talk) 11:42, 14 July 2008 (UTC)

Image:Lviv - Arsenal - 26.jpg

• Nomination Helberds --Lestath 18:40, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
• Discussion
•  Oppose Not sharp --Massimo Catarinella 22:56, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
•  InfoFocus is on the helberds and photo is sharp. --Lestath 23:12, 5 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Support Seems OK --Nevit 16:49, 9 July 2008 (UTC)
•  Oppose focus ok but two appear to have the pointy end cut off. Gnangarra 13:36, 13 July 2008 (UTC)

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Decline?   Lycaon 18:50, 13 July 2008 (UTC)