Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/August-2019

Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.


	Older Archive
	Miscellaneous Archive
2004:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2005:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2006:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2007:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2008:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2009:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2010:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2011:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2012:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2013:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2014:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2015:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2016:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2017:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2018:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2019:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2020:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2021:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2022:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2023:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2024:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
2025:	January - February - March - April - May - June - July - August - September - October - November - December
Purge page cache if nominations haven't updated.

Ira Roe Foster - Brigadier General (circa 1850)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 04:18:30 (UTC)

**Original** – both the subject, and the photograph itself, are historically significant. This image is from the early period of photographic portraits - of an individual who was an active participant in many of the key political events of his day.

Reason: A historically significant image of a Georgia Militia General taken within a few years of the first photographic portrait extant
Articles in which this image appears: Ira Roe Foster
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History
Creator: the creator of this image is Iris Smale, a descendant, who owns the original. The creator of the original image is lost to time.

Support as nominator – Gulbenk (talk) 04:18, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – The quality of this image is way below acceptable, even considering the EV. --Janke | Talk 07:41, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Speedy close - well below the resolution limit. MER-C 08:48, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:38, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy close, bellow the site requirements. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:38, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea Manning

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 00:28:54 (UTC)

**Alternative 1** – Chelsea Manning in 2017

Reason: I've been a IP editor. I've tried multiple times to nominate it and realised I couldn't because I didn't have an account.
Articles in which this image appears: Chelsea Manning
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Military for original or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political for alternative 1
Creator: United States Army for original
Tim Travers Hawkins for alternative 1

Support as nominator – TheMistfan (talk) 00:28, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 16:44, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose — I have to oppose featuring a photograph of a subject that is completely counter to how the subject perceives herselve. Especially since the availability of File:Chelsea Manning on 18 May 2017.jpg which I support as an ALT. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 17:52, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Coffeeandcrumbs. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:13, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (both). In addition to the issue of disrespect, it's a rather bland posed photograph. No strong opinion on the alt right now, but as it's a completely different picture used in a different way, I think it should nominated separately. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:03, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pardon me? Disrespect? Did I even refer to her as Bradley Manning?, In 2012 whether you like it or not she was still male. She no longer is now. Never meant disrespect. --TheMistfan (talk) 19:17, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't mean to accuse you of behaving disrespectfully; if that was suggested by what I wrote, then I should have been clearer. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:01, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose the original per Coffeeandcrumbs and per the point that, well, it's a rather bland posed photograph. The second is better — it's at least "author photo on book jacket" instead of "Department of Motor Vehicles", metaphorically speaking — but maybe it should be nominated separately. XOR'easter (talk) 13:17, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:10, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Red-billed gull

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 13:03:26 (UTC)

Reason: Continuing the theme of New Zealand birds with this freshly minted FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Red-billed gull
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: Michal Klajban

Support as nominator – MER-C 13:03, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support –Yann (talk) 17:12, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:18, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 20:25, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:39, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support although it looks almost taxidermy.©Geni (talk) 19:03, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Red-billed gull, Red Zone, Christchurch, New Zealand.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:13, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kriéger Landaulette

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Aug 2019 at 17:18:02 (UTC)

**Original** – Senator George P. Wetmore of Rhode Island in a Krieger Landaulette electric car

Reason: historical picture of high quality and value
Articles in which this image appears: Kriéger Company of Electric Vehicles, George P. Wetmore
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator: Harris & Ewing, Inc.

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 17:18, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:19, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - needs restoration. Defects on the senator's and his wife's faces are particularly bad and detract from the EV. MER-C 14:43, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Agree - but those defects appear to be attempts of retouching the original negative. (That was often done, but this looks quite clumsy.) A restoration would be difficult, it's obvious the man has some kind of scar on his chin/neck. Restoring that to original appearance would be quite difficult... --Janke | Talk 20:05, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Actually, that's damage to the picture. Compare File:SenatorGeorgePeabodyWetmore.jpg
  - I see clear evidence of retouching there, too. I think he has a scar there. (Check it full size!) --Janke | Talk 19:21, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 20:23, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Damaged on faces. I'm doing a restoration. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 17:19, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Careful about the scar, note retouched referece above... --Janke | Talk 19:29, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Song Thrush

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2019 at 09:33:14 (UTC)

Reason: High quality and good EV.
Articles in which this image appears: Song Thrush
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 09:33, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 14:41, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 20:20, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – The DOF is so good. @JJ Harrison:, bravo! I can actually see droplets of dew on the bird's belly. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 02:59, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cwilson97 (talk) 18:17, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Turdus philomelos - Western Springs Lakeside Park.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 10:36, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chelsea Manning on 18 May 2017

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Aug 2019 at 22:11:05 (UTC)

**Original** – A photograph posted by Chelsea Manning on Twitter with the caption: "Okay, so here I am everyone!! =P"

Reason: This is Chelsea Manning.
Articles in which this image appears: Chelsea Manning + 2
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Tim Travers Hawkins

Support as nominator – --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:11, 26 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 20:19, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lady's nose is not in focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:36, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Cwilson97 (talk) 18:05, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 05:17, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 11:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Chelsea Manning on 18 May 2017.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:42, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Quedlinburg Abbey

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 19:35:04 (UTC)

**Original** – Castle and abbey of Quedlinburg

Reason: Nice image, good EV, recently minted FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Quedlinburg Abbey, Quedlinburg, etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: A.Savin

Support as nominator – MER-C 19:35, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:41, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 20:16, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:37, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for nominating. --A.Savin (talk) 12:01, 29 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Quedlinburg asv2018-10 img03 Castle.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rosy ermine moth

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 20:49:40 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. FP on Commons. Adds value to articles.
Articles in which this image appears: Trosia, Trosia nigropunctigera
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:49, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support great. Tomer T (talk) 22:14, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support excellent. MER-C 10:31, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Just wow! --- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:44, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:31, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 08:43, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support JJ Harrison (talk) 01:42, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Rosy ermine moth (Trosia nigropunctigera).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:53, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Southern rough-winged swallow

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 20:56:08 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. FP on Commons. Adds value to articles.
Articles in which this image appears: Southern rough-winged swallow, Stelgidopteryx, Lebrija River
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:56, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 10:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 08:40, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – I would have removed the spider web. It looks like damage and is not important to the subject but is distracting. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:17, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cwilson97 (talk) 18:18, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Can't possibly support, the background is blurry and that's unnatural. :) JJ Harrison (talk) 08:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Southern rough-winged swallow (Stelgidopteryx ruficollis ruficollis).JPG --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:58, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Las Lajas Sanctuary

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 22:13:13 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality, nice details of the church, high EV composition showing the settings for the basilica
Articles in which this image appears: Las Lajas Sanctuary, Ipiales, Tourism in Colombia
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Poco a poco

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 22:13, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 22:35, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 10:33, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Cwilson97 (talk) 18:03, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:49, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Lovely detail of both the basilica and surroundings. Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:40, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:49, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Santuario de Las Lajas, Ipiales, Colombia, 2015-07-21, DD 26-27 HDR.JPG --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:14, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Orange cup coral

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Aug 2019 at 22:51:32 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality for underwater photography, high EV
Articles in which this image appears: Orange cup coral
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Cnidaria
Creator: Alex.vasenin

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 22:51, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - messy composition. MER-C 10:28, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree it is a messy composition, but it has wow factor and is an underwater shot. Here is another composition, it shows the potential for better compositions. Support for the wow factor and EV. I think I like it too much not to support! Bammesk (talk) 13:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Cwilson97 (talk) 18:11, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 14:20, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:24, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Guion Bluford

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Aug 2019 at 19:30:29 (UTC)

Reason: Guion Bluford is the first African American to go to space. He went to space four times. This photograph was taken just a few months before his last trip in the Space Shuttle program.
Articles in which this image appears: Guion Bluford, List of African-American astronauts + 3 others
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
Creator: NASA; retouched by Coffeeandcrumbs

Support as nominator – --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:30, 28 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Whatever he's looking at, it isn't the camera. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:42, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Charlesjsharp, I think he is looking at the camera. I think he has a slight esotropia. (If you cover one eye at a time with your finger you will notice both eyes are separately looking at you but they point in slightly different directions.) His other portrait is worse (where he is looking completely in a different direction) also shows that he has esotropia. Surprising for an astronaut! For en.wiki, this photo is the best option for the lead image. He is now 76 years old and this photo was taken when he was 50. I think this photo is the best representation we have of the subject. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 18:02, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - As you say, surprising for an astronaut. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:17, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - Over the past few hours, I have looked at dozens of photos of Bluford. Every one them shows similar characteristic in his eyes, very pronounced in some photos. However, I cannot locate RS to verify a diagnosis. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:00, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:39, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 08:37, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The esotropia isn't flattering but if that's what he looks like it's what he looks like; it's not a flaw in the photo. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:01, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cwilson97 (talk) 18:13, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Guion Bluford.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:48, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chuquicamata

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Aug 2019 at 19:05:06 (UTC)

Reason: I couldn't tell it from a hole in the ground. Nice detail, FP on Commons. (There is a panorama of the mine, also a FP on Commons, but it is cut off on the left hand side. Please say if you want it considered.)
Articles in which this image appears: Chuquicamata
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator: Diego Delso

Support as nominator – MER-C 19:05, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Monochromatic tableau lacking a central focus. – Sca (talk) 21:51, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I think the panorama is more encyclopedic. Bammesk (talk) 01:58, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Confusing perspective, especially when comparing to the panorama. As you said, you couldn't tell it from a hole in the ground. I'd say it looks rather dull. Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:39, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. This could look good printed very large, in the vein of Edward Burtynsky. That way you could see the vehicles more clearly and get a better sense of scale. But I think that cropping out all the context makes it less encyclopedic, and that it doesn't work as well at the small image sizes typical of an encyclopedia article. —David Eppstein (talk) 07:07, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:03, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CT scan of a pregnancy

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Aug 2019 at 13:33:41 (UTC)

**Original** – CT scan with volume rendering of a woman who was pregnant at 37 weeks.

Reason: *The acquisition of an image like this depends on a series of unlikely events. First, the pregnancy was relatively late, making the baby's anatomy more clear. Second, the woman had to be in an accident serious enough to warrant a CT without radiation dose reduction (which would be of much lower quality, and in this case it was a high speed traffic accident). At the same time, the woman did not have any visible physical damage, thereby allowing for an image of normal anatomy (and getting her written consent for its online publication).

Several processing steps in order to make a rotating gif image from CT data. However, I do not know how to remove the "FLP" and cube at the bottom.
Although there's a larger version, that one is too big to be animated in the wiki.

Articles in which this image appears: Pregnancy, Medical imaging, Medical imaging in pregnancy
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Sciences/Biology
Creator: Mikael Häggström

Support as nominator – Mikael Häggström (talk) 13:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - high EV, and unusual for FPC. MER-C 14:40, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Top EV, indeed. (I actually thought of the radiation risk before reading the info...) --Janke | Talk 21:33, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:37, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:21, 1 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – though shouldn't we feature the highest resolution version, with a note that the lower resolution version needs to be used for thumbnail use in articles for technical reasons? (But that seems a technical question, the content is the same.) TSP (talk) 12:13, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

To me, it seems counter-intuitive for Wikipedia to feature a version that it cannot properly display. Mikael Häggström (talk) 12:51, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Imagine if we could support some modern video and animation formats. How cool would that be? JJ Harrison (talk) 06:39, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Geoffroi 07:22, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:10, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Volume rendered CT scan of a pregnancy of 37 weeks of gestational age (smaller).gif --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:56, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Variable Oystercatcher

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 01:35:37 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image of a New Zealand endemic
Articles in which this image appears: Variable oystercatcher
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 01:35, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – EV. Bammesk (talk) 12:52, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 09:38, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though if you can get a bit more DoF in front of the bird, I think it'll improve your compositions. The immediate foreground always looks a little odd in them. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 10:38, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Do you mean to say that I lied down in wet sand for nothing?! =) JJ Harrison (talk) 03:54, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Haematopus unicolor - Point Chevalier.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:03, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Apostlebird

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Aug 2019 at 01:38:09 (UTC)

CSS image crop, suggestion

Reason: Reshoot!
Articles in which this image appears: Apostlebird
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 01:38, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose blurred foreground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Effect of the lens, not manual blurring. See this. --cart-Talk 10:23, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, as I said, opposed on aethetic grounds. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:56, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

That was said on my talk page on Commons, not here, so I'm glad you clarified your vote on this page too. Your very short reviews can sometimes be too short and hard to understand. --cart-Talk 13:48, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Contrast between grass and blurred parts just looks unnatural. --A.Savin (talk) 13:10, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a good compo IMO. In some cases this special lens can make astonishing photos, but for this the bird gets sharp while the whole scene looks strange and unnatural. --cart-Talk 14:04, 2 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I added a CSS image crop as a suggestion. The image has EV. Per user:Cart I looked at the flickr examples here. These two photographers [1], [2] list lens settings very similar to the nom image. The foreground bokeh's abrupt transition to the in-focus region is a common thing [3], [4], [5], [6]. These two photos [7], [8] are very interesting: same lens setting but dissimilar bokeh because of foreground distance or elevation. Here is the lens wide open: [9]. Bammesk (talk) 14:25, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Just as an addendum. There is a technique aspect to this - the photo is taken prone with the camera very close to the ground. This means that the background is relatively distant and hence out of focus. JJ Harrison (talk) 09:06, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Noted, it makes more sense now. The heavy blur of the foreground bokeh is distracting. Such blur is common in backgrounds (expected), but not usually seen in foregrounds. Also, the abrupt transition between it and the in-focus region amplifies the effect, as if the ground is elevated in the near field and obstructing the view, rather than flat. Weak support original, some cropping of the foreground would be an improvement IMO. Bammesk (talk) 16:00, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt Cwilson97 (talk) 18:14, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Alt.--Vulp here 09:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:04, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Polystichum setiferum

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Aug 2019 at 09:53:18 (UTC)

Reason: Nice detail, recently unanimously featured on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Polystichum setiferum
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants
Creator: Dominicus Johannes Bergsma

Support as nominator – MER-C 09:53, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – but I prefer this version, it looks sharp enough and is easier to look at (it has a softer background). Bammesk (talk) 12:50, 3 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you for nominating my photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:27, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:09, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 09:35, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Polystichum setiferum 'Cristato Pinnulum' (Niervaren). (d.j.b.). 02.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:16, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Umhlanga, Eswatini

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 06:21:40 (UTC)

**Original** – The 2006 Umhlanga (Reed Dance) ceremony in Eswatini.

Reason: I think this serves a purpose separate to the identification of the people in it (though the centremost one is Sikhanyiso Dlamini): It does an excellent job at showing the garb and pomp of Umhlanga
Articles in which this image appears: Umhlanga (ceremony), Swazi people, Sikhanyiso Dlamini
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle seems best.
Creator: Amada44

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 06:21, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Has that 'snapshot' feel about it. The cut-off breast on the LHS isn't good. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Sorry Adam, but running a crowd pic without IDs serves little purpose in terms of EV. (An exception might be crowd pix illustrating major news events. But even the most widely known photo from the 1970 Kent State shooting carried IDs.) – Sca (talk) 14:18, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sca: That's hardly true. Festivals generally don't have everyone identified. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 16:23, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to contradict again, but my professional experience is otherwise. If you really want to know I can tell you about a local illustrated magazine I once helped edit. Sca (talk) 20:11, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PS: As an ed. I'd be reluctant to run a photo whose point of focus seems to be the subject's exposed right breast. No prude here, but it seems inappropriate. Sca (talk) 20:15, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - jumbled, unfocused composition. MER-C 14:28, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – I am all for featuring au naturale but this is just not FP material. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 00:55, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support (but please crop that LHS nipple out per Charles). I'm going to go against the grain here - I think it has EV and we constantly fail to promote photojournalistic or documentary images of the human world. JJ Harrison (talk) 06:37, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:19, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The Guilty Mother

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 05:15:20 (UTC)

Reason: For the oddly least-well-known of the Figaro plays, there's still a lot to like. Bégéarss, an Irishman (I'm pretty sure his name is a terrible pun, think something like "Begorrah!"), is the character it, in a way, turns around, his schemes pushing everything forwards. It's a very good illustration. ~~I've cropped it to centre the text. I could see cropping the note in the bottom right closer to, to centre the figure more.~~ Crop is a compromise between image and text centering.
Articles in which this image appears: The Guilty Mother
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: Émile Bayard, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 05:15, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 12:31, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:04, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Masum Reza^📞 21:09, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 07:16, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:07, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Émile Bayard - Beaumarchais - Bégéarss in La mère coupable, 1876.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:26, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marsh fritillaries mating (2)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 20:59:59 (UTC)

**Original** – Marsh fritillary butterflies (*Euphydryas aurinia*) mating (male left, female right) in Dorset, England

Reason: High EV. Very sharp image. FP on Commons. Previous nomination got nominator's vote and 2 support votes Chris Woodrich, Janke , no oppose votes
Articles in which this image appears: Marsh fritillary
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:59, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 12:59, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:08, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Masum Reza^📞 21:07, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 22:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 07:13, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:07, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Marsh fritillaries (Euphydryas aurinia) mating.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:45, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Two-tailed pasha (2)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Aug 2019 at 21:07:55 (UTC)

**Original** – Two-tailed pasha (*Charaxes jasius jasius*) in Sithonia, Greece. The only charaxes butterfly in Europe.

Reason: first nomination for the nominator's vote and 3 support votes PetarM, Chris Woodrich, Marvellous Spider-Man.No oppose votes.
Articles in which this image appears: Charaxes jasius
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:07, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 16:48, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
How about rotating it 90 degrees? It would be easier to look at. Bammesk (talk) 02:10, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I do rotate butterfly images, but this is a normal position for this species. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:17, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Furthermore, if rotated, the light would appear to come from below - which would look quite unnatural! Support --Janke | Talk 17:03, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not if the image is rotated 90 degrees as suggested (clockwise). The light would be coming from right, slightly above horizon. Bammesk (talk) 02:13, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But the feet would be all wrong - see the way it is gripping the twig. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Masum Reza^📞 21:06, 6 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 07:12, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:07, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support JJ Harrison (talk) 06:35, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Two-tailed pasha (Charaxes jasius jasius) Greece.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:46, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Set: Heinrich C. Berann NPS panoramas

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Aug 2019 at 15:13:09 (UTC)

North Cascades National Park (1987)
Yosemite National Park (1989)
Yellowstone National Park (1991)
Denali National Park and Preserve (1994)

Reason: Recently featured in the Signpost and just passed FPC unanimously on Commons. These are truly outstanding maps, with a reproduction that is equally excellent. For context, see [10].
Articles in which this image appears: Heinrich C. Berann
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Maps
Creator: Heinrich C. Berann

Support as nominator – MER-C 15:13, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – The scans look quite overexposed and oversaturated, outright gaudy. Can we find another reference? --Janke | Talk 17:09, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- File:Heinrich Berann NPS Yellowstone.jpg, [11]. MER-C 18:35, 7 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 09:06, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Promote all. Masum Reza^📞 09:51, 8 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Both a beautiful impression, and extraordinary detail. Mikael Häggström (talk) 06:19, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support JJ Harrison (talk) 06:35, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 09:32, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:34, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of North Cascades without labels.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of Yosemite without labels.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of Yellowstone without labels.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Promoted File:Heinrich Berann NPS Panorama of Denali without labels.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:52, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Clavulinopsis sulcata

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 06:34:05 (UTC)

Reason: Illustrates the article well. Well lit and focus stacked for more stuff in focus than a single shot.
Articles in which this image appears: Clavulinopsis sulcata
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Fungi
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 06:34, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 08:55, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 01:46, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 09:30, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:15, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:12, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 11:39, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Clavulinopsis sulcata - Lane Cove River.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:47, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gliophorus chromolimoneus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Aug 2019 at 06:31:35 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image of a small subject.
Articles in which this image appears: Gliophorus chromolimoneus
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Fungi
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 06:31, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 13:07, 9 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 01:45, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 09:28, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:09, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 11:39, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Gliophorus chromolimoneus - Ferndale Park.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 07:48, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kriéger Landaulette redux

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 01:44:26 (UTC)

Reason: A fine image of an electric vehicle in use. Sorry it took so long to restore. Previous nomination: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Kriéger Landaulette. It's CSS cropped in articles, but I think it's useful to have the full size.
Articles in which this image appears: Kriéger Company of Electric Vehicles, George P. Wetmore
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator: Harris & Ewing, Inc., restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 01:44, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 09:26, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good job fixing the botched retouching! --Janke | Talk 11:17, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Janke: Honestly, the sad thing is it probably wasn't exactly botched. If it was meant for a newspaper or the like, exaggerating the mouth lines might have been valuable - and the resolution woukdn't have been high enough for anyone to care about the zoomed-in effect. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 16:18, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 12:19, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 11:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Senator George P. Wetmore of Rhode Island in a Krieger electric automobile.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:00, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Noordhoek, Cape Town

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 13:22:11 (UTC)

**Original** – Noordhoek Beach from Chapman's Peak Drive with Kommetjie in the distance.

Reason: Seen on Commons FPC last week, where it passed unanimously.
Articles in which this image appears: Noordhoek, Cape Town
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator: Diego Delso

Support as nominator – MER-C 13:22, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 11:40, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support but want oppose because I am jealous. ;-P --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:26, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 05:40, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 03:18, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Playa Noordhoek, Sudáfrica, 2018-07-23, DD 126.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:31, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pauline Adams redux

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Aug 2019 at 21:53:33 (UTC)

**Original** – Pauline Adams, suffragette, in her prison garb from her arrest for attempting to "flaunt their banners" in front of Woodrow Wilson's reviewing stand before a Selective Service parade on September 4, 1917." She later appealed, under the grounds her rights were "flagrantly disregarded in the trial court and that they were not accorded a fair and impartial trial" - and won.

Reason: Fixed the top of the cup after the criticism in the last nomination of the top of the cup being cut off. Enough of the edge still exists that, with perspective, it's easy to reconstruct the top edge.
Articles in which this image appears: Pauline Adams
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Uncredited photographer, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 21:53, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Did she really say her rights were "fragrantly disregarded" or is that a typo for "flagrantly"? If the former, we need a [sic]. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:13, 10 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Typo. I checked the source, and corrected the article. Don't know how I missed that. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 14:32, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It would work well with a certain type of humor, though. – Sca (talk) 14:43, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Not bad for a century-old photo. I like the quasi-Statue of Liberty pose. – Sca (talk) 14:46, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 17:32, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Kaldari (talk) 19:36, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:28, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question. Is it considered acceptable to extrapolate significant portions of the image out of thin air, call it a restoration, and not even mention it in the caption? It's a fine image now, but shouldn't it be more clearly labeled as a photo-illustration rather than calling it a photo? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:14, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It is just the top of a cup, part of which was there before. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 05:00, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - The restoration is mentioned in the file info, albeit buried in the version list... Might better be mentioned in the file description. --Janke | Talk 06:13, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Janke and David Eppstein: I've added some text about it. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 21:49, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 05:43, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support after the update to the description. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:56, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @David Eppstein: Sorry about that! I added it when I saw Janke's suggestion, but didn't think to mention it here until now. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 22:30, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Mrs. Pauline Adams 147002v.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Palestine sunbird (2)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2019 at 18:56:24 (UTC)

**Original** – Male palestine sunbird (*Cinnyris osea osea) in the Dana Biosphere Reserve, Jordan*

Reason: High quality image of a bird that barely stops while feeding. FP on Commons. National bird of Palestine. On first nomination received 4 support votes (Chris Woodrich, Yann, Brandmeister) including nominator. No oppose votes.
Articles in which this image appears: Palestine sunbird, Cinnyris, List of national animals
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:56, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Be nice if you can identify the flower as well? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:30, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can anyone help identify the plant/flower? Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:28, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One place to ask is Wikipedia:Reference desk/Science. MER-C 19:52, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support – Yann (talk) 05:45, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 08:47, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 15:42, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. DreamSparrow ^Chat 04:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Palestine sunbird (Cinnyris osea osea) male.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:57, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grivet (2)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Aug 2019 at 19:06:10 (UTC)

**Original** – Grivet (*Chlorocebus aethiops*) from Ethiopia

Reason: High quality image illustrates article well. FP on Commons. Received two support votes (Wii Willie Wiki) (including nominator). No oppose votes.
Articles in which this image appears: Grivet, Chlorocebus
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:06, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Excuse me if this a stupid question, but do we know gender? --- Coffeeandcrumbs 20:35, 12 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I try to look in the right place, but not this time... Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:24, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Show - Place - Win"... ;-) --Janke | Talk 16:40, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 21:09, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is it a bit underexposed perhaps? JJ Harrison (talk) 03:52, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Looks fine on my monitor. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:49, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Remember Wikipedia surrounds it with white, which may bias viewers of the thumbnail a little bit. I also think it's fine, though I suppose, since acceptable exposure is a range, a little tweaking would be acceptable, but not too much. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 15:57, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:08, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:08, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sikhanyiso Dlamini

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Jul 2019 at 14:16:21 (UTC)

Reason: A really fine image of the royalty of an extremely under-represented country.
Articles in which this image appears: Sikhanyiso Dlamini, Culture of Eswatini, and a gallery usage in Eswatini
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Royalty
Creator: Amada44

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 14:16, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support either. Eye-catching, high-quality, and encyclopedic. I'm curious about something: the caption explains the red feathers in her hair (a mark of royalty) but not the thing she's carrying, which (from its appearance in the rest of the set) appears to be some kind of ceremonial weapon, possibly a mace. Would it be possible to track down an explanation and add it to the caption? —David Eppstein (talk) 16:31, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It can be seen better in File:Princess Swaziland 013.jpg Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 19:53, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support in principle~~ – as an intriguing and engaging human image (Could be cropped a bit on both sides.) However, the person to the subject's left (right side of frame) really must be identified also. – Sca (talk) 22:42, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- There's a crop at File:Princess Sikhanyiso Dlamini-001.jpg but I think it's too tight and cuts off the other princess's face. But I think cropping from the left side only, down to around a 5x4 aspect ratio, could help focus attention on the subject better. —David Eppstein (talk) 23:19, 21 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- We know the person next to her is another member of the royal family. Probably Princess Temaswati Dlamini, given she's the only one of about the right age. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 01:11, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
~~Conditional~~ support, prefer original - please identify the other person in the image. MER-C 10:00, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @MER-C: I mean, it's probably Princess Temaswati Dlamini, but I'm not going to be able to provide sources for that other than lists of the Eswatini royalty and identified photographs of her from a few years later. Only royalty is allowed that headdress, though. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 15:04, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

FYI, several other Wikis use a very tightly cropped version with their Sikhanyiso Dlamini articles. It excludes all but the other person's ear, which obviates the ID issue, although aesthetically it's less interesting. →
– Sca (talk) 16:04, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

We could just say "another member of the royal family" in the caption. I think that part is clear enough. Searching Getty Images for Temaswati finds images of her in similar costume from 2004, 2005, and 2007, but unfortunately not 2006, and the 2005 image shows several other young women also wearing the red feathers, so I think we can't just assume that this is Temaswati. There is also another photo from 2006, but without names; she is third in the line after the leader of the dance and then Sikhanyiso, suggesting that she probably is indeed Temaswati, but again there are quite a few others with red feathers. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:52, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please excuse me for saying so, but from a journalistic point of view, saying "another member of" would be laughably tantamount to saying "and someone else, whose name we failed to get." – Sca (talk) 22:17, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It is clear that we do not have documentation for the name. Why do you think it is inappropriate or laughable to say so? Do you think we should try to cover it up or pretend to knowledge that we don't have? Do you think we also need the name of the blurred woman in the left margin or the blurred man on the right? Does our lack of knowledge of these things somehow turn this into a bad photo of Sikhanyiso Dlamini, or of the reed dance? —David Eppstein (talk) 22:48, 22 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

People shown in FPs should be identified. Otherwise readers will be left asking, "Who's this?" - Sca (talk) 01:54, 23 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – There is no need for the other person's name. The composition centers on the princess, the other person is incidental to the composition, especially with the blade in front of her face. The article, the EV and the photo all center on the princess. The Alt 1 crop is too tight, the origonal is better, it shows the princess in a group setting, and doesn't cut off her pole awkwardly on the left. Bammesk (talk) 03:54, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Due to lack of ID for second person in photo. I do so reluctantly, but I can't endorse cavalier disregard for established and logical editorial practice. – Sca (talk) 13:21, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have emailed some people about the ID of the person right. How is the etiquette about voting on the own photograph? Amada44 ^{talk to me} 13:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Photographers support, or nominate and support their own photos all the time. MER-C 13:33, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If the ID were found, I'd support. Sca (talk) 14:14, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Alt 1 is a bit better. No need for the name of the other person. –Yann (talk) 17:11, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm leaning towards opposition while the second subject is unidentified. Perhaps it would be worth putting this on hold while it's looked into? Josh Milburn (talk) 19:05, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't find the stated reason as compelling the promotion of an average composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:41, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Hold for a few weeks until Amada44 can come back with ID for the second royal in the photograph. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 14:16, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- agree, if possible. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 17:34, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - that would be nice. I did not hear back but I'll get that name! Amada44 ^{talk to me} 18:53, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- - - Amada44, just so you know an IP at the Reference Desk has suggested that it may be Princess Tiyandza Dlamini. Just for the record, I support the original conditional on ID. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 21:41, 30 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
~~Put on hold~~ Closure postponed for 2-3 weeks ~~per above~~ to give time for the identification of the second person in the image. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:21, 31 July 2019 (UTC)[Amended Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:10, 11 August 2019 (UTC)][reply]
- I mean, we are in the situation where if Amada44 supported it, it'd be passing, but it's still better if it is identified. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 06:14, 4 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ The original. The crop is a bit too tight imho. I am a bit further with the ID of the person right, but not quite there yet. Amada44 ^{talk to me} 11:04, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, but the voting period already ended. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 00:28, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Armbrust: if this nomination is listed as "on hold" (as it is), what do you mean by claiming that there can be no more supports and by striking the support that was added after it was put on hold? Do you intend that we should continue to keep this on hold until the identity issue is resolved but then go back and count only the opinions that were expressed before it went on hold, even though some of the opinions are explicitly based on the missing information that caused the hold? What is the point of putting a nomination into such a "frozen but will automatically fail once it unfreezes" state? —David Eppstein (talk) 00:47, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@David Eppstein: Okay, I may have phrased that poorly. Now fixed. (BTW there are 4 supports and 1 conditional support, so once id is provided it automatically passes.) Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:10, 11 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The second person is still not identified, and without that there isn't enough support for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 17:21, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ambrust: it feels weird to ignore a vote that happened while suspended, but still unsuspend it... Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 20:43, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Good news, I got an answer. Its Temtsimba Dlamini. Cheers, Amada44 ^{talk to me} 10:57, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Just as I said :).--TMCk (talk) 11:26, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@TracyMcClark: yes! thank you! I pursued that but I found it really hard to say if its really her because of the age difference and that there are not many pictures of her. Sikhanyiso confirmed it so now we know 100% :) Cheers, Amada44 ^{talk to me} 11:43, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You're right although her cute nose is quite unique.--TMCk (talk) 11:55, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Fantastic work! We need more Eswatini images at FP, so I'm going to have to dig through your photography, Amada. Unless you'd rather? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 16:31, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Veraison

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Aug 2019 at 19:50:19 (UTC)

Reason: Was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it was featured unanimously. High EV, nice capture.
Articles in which this image appears: Veraison, Zinfandel
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Fruits
Creator: Frank Schulenburg

Support as nominator – MER-C 19:50, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Thanks so much. This is very meaningful to me, as Sonoma winemaking has been close to my heart ever since moving to the U.S. Btw I’m planning a project to cover wine making in California for 2020. So, more to come… —Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:01, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Frank Schulenburg: You are permitted to vote support on your own photo. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 09:09, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Some of the grapes don't look all healthy, have damage, so better images must exist or can be taken. Waiting for more to come! :-) --Janke | Talk 20:04, 13 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I also find the composition rather messy, with distracting background. --Janke | Talk 08:53, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Minor damage, nothing more. It'd be weird to have everything perfect, in my opinion. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 04:50, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Very natural, good specimen, and nice lighting. We don't want a photo one can find in a coffee table book but rather an authentic representative photo, which this very much is. The subject veraison is very well represented here. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 09:01, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Well I do want a photo I could find in a coffee table book. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Commons is over there. I want photos that I would find in a modern good encyclopedia. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 19:32, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose – good EV, but the shadows (lighting) and background can be better, per Janke a better image can be taken. Bammesk (talk) 02:12, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:35, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Louisa May Alcott

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 04:48:33 (UTC)

Reason: A fine image of someone I've wanted to have an image for for years. Author of many books, amongst which Little Women is probably the most famous, Civil War nurse and abolitionist, she has a fascinating life. Before this, the best image we had of her was teeny-tiny and badly over exposed.
Articles in which this image appears: Louisa May Alcott et al.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: George Kendall Warren (d. 1884); restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.8% of all FPs} 04:48, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Top EV. --Janke | Talk 07:23, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – A shoo-in. – Sca (talk) 13:52, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 15:59, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:11, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. DreamSparrow ^Chat 04:41, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Louisa May Alcott, c. 1870 - Warren's Portraits, Boston.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 05:23, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Queen bee

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Aug 2019 at 19:25:14 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality, high EV, marvellous composition
Articles in which this image appears: Queen bee, Animal identification, Gyne, Invasive species in the United States
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Scott Bauer, USDA Agricultural Research Service

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 19:25, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I'm somewhat unsure about the marking. It's otherwise very good. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 20:27, 14 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – EV. I am Ok with the marking, for encyclopedic use. Focus looks a bit off on top-left corner, but that's because a couple of bees are climbing on top of others!! The composition makes up for it. Bammesk (talk) 02:25, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 18:06, 15 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. DreamSparrow ^Chat 04:40, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I like the marking; what it takes away from in-the-wild authenticity, it adds back in viewer ease of picking out the queen given the description in the caption. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:26, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Marking misleads. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: I'm also unsure about the marking. Is this standard practice in apiaries or entomological research? (I should know this, but I don't.) Josh Milburn (talk) 19:01, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Yes, marking queen bees is standard practice in beekeeping, at least over here in Germany. I happen to know a club of beekeepers and they have shown me queen bees they had purchased from breeders and which are always marked. The chosen form of marking for each group of species is nicely presented in the article Animal identification enlisted above. Someone could surely provide an second image with an unmarked queen bee, but, however, this image displaying a marked queen bee accompanied by a throng of worker bees AND all in nigh-perfect focus well illustrates the central theme "marked queen bee" and is certainly worthy of featured picture status. Maybe the title should be extended accordingly. Caveat: My mainstay is at Wiki commons thus I regrettably cannot vote for support here, lacking the required number of wikipedia edits. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 14:11, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Useful comments. If the file title is changed, I would withdraw my oppose. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:05, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot think of a qualifying justification for a rename at Commons. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:35, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support – I have read the discussion above and I am now convinced. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:35, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Apis mellifera scutellata 1355021.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:02, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Eryngium giganteum 'Miss Willmott's Ghost'

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Aug 2019 at 17:30:13 (UTC)

Reason: Sharp photo with many FP support on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears: Eryngium giganteum, also https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Panicaut
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Plants
Creator: famberhorst

Support as nominator – Famberhorst (talk) 17:30, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
But this is currently unused on en, so how can it be featured? —David Eppstein (talk) 18:00, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It is now, check the file description page. MER-C 19:09, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Have to wait 7 days I think. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:47, 16 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Charlesjsharp: I really can't get too worried about the week timer when the page it's on hadn't been edited for two months before than. But the article seems very crowded with images, with this shoved at the bottom, so I'm not convinced by usage at the moment. I'd fix up its use in the article and come back. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 04:37, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – photo has wow factor and is technically good. But the article is weak, too short. It will improve the encyclopedic value if the article can be expanded by a paragraph or two. Also this photo is competing with the infobox image which is an impressive photo, more so given the article is so short. Bammesk (talk) 01:05, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:51, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Capitolium of Brixia

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 14:00:36 (UTC)

Reason: FP on Commons of this World Heritage site
Articles in which this image appears: Capitolium of Brixia, Longobards in Italy: Places of Power (568–774 A.D.), Brixia
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Wolfgang Moroder

Support as nominator – MER-C 14:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 00:54, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – DreamSparrow ^Chat 02:58, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:40, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I love archaelogical sites of all kinds: excavations, ruins, and also reconstructions as depicted. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 21:16, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Corrected my previous "support" to "comment", as I lack the required number of Wikipedia edits, thus not yet being entitled to vote. I guess I had mistakenly assumed I was voting for a Wiki Commons Featured picture candidate. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 12:45, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 15:06, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. Shame about the modern buildings impinging on the upper left but it looks difficult to find a viewpoint that would avoid them and give a similarly-good remaining composition. —David Eppstein (talk) 05:45, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Tempio Capitolino Piazza del Foro Brescia.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:56, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Passiflora caerulea (blue passionflower) STEREO (R-L)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Aug 2019 at 17:50:07 (UTC)

**Original** – Two Passiflora caerulea flowers arranged as a stereo image pair. To be viewed cross-eyed.

Reason: It is the first cross-eyed stereo image included in the stereoscopy article and one of very few cross-eyed stereo images at all, Featured picture (also Quality image) within the category "plants" on Wiki commons, POTD 2019-08-14 on French Wikipedia, high-resolution image, link to stereoscopy article on French wikipedia.
Articles in which this image appears: stereoscopy, fr: Stéréoscopie, fr: "Image du jour" / Picture of the Day 2019-08-14
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Photographic techniques, terms, and equipment
Creator: Franz van Duns

Support as nominator – Franz van Duns (talk) 17:50, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Needs to be in article for 7 days to be eligible. Shall we wait, or will you re-nominate is when 7 days have passed? ~~Tentative~~ support. --Janke | Talk 19:32, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Oops, many thanks for this crucial hint! I admit I had overlooked this statement "min. 7 days wait after adding to the article before nominating" on my highly exciting journey through the ways and wends of Wikipedia's numerous regulation pages, coming as I am from just over a year's membership at Wiki commons with its slightly different set of nomination proceedings. Yes, of course, I am absolutely willing to comply and thus agree to wait the required 7 days' latency period (i.e. from 15 August till 23 August 2019) before proceeding, and I'll surely wait for the required 7 days should I ever nominate another image. But in this case I do think this image's encyclopaedic value will entice enough supporters within the given time span and will thus justify this extra quarantine period. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 21:00, 18 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I have tried to look at this in 3D, but no luck! Am I missing something, is there a technique, glasses, etc? Bammesk (talk) 00:51, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- For some people, it's simply impossible. You can at least try by displaying the pair in a smaller size (say, 100 mm or so), then concentrate your focus on your own nose tip, and slowly let your eye muscles relax. At some point the images (may hopefully) coalesce, and you see the 3-D image. This one is really good, BTW. --Janke | Talk 07:06, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- As Janke correctly states, cross-eyed viewing is impossible for some people (including my wife and others I have tested in this request, check Stereoscopy#Visual_requirements), but it is otherwise very handy for unaided viewing straight from the screen, as no viewing apparatus is required. Works astoundingly well (at least for me) even if the stereo pair is displayed at full screen size, thus providing a level of detail not possible with standard stereo viewers due to their limited image size. See article Stereoscopy#Freeviewing, which explains the two possible arrangements for stereo viewing.
  For all others I have supplied a version arrranged for parallel viewing (click on the above image and scroll to "Other versions"), which can be viewed under a stereoscope / stereoscopic viewer after having been resized to a range between 60x60 mm and 100x100 mm each image. And, for any other purpose, e.g. stereo viewing of individual sections of a stereo image, I have also supplied the two single images which compose the stereo pairs. Just enlarge these, each within its own individual window, say to 50%, then shift both images until the detail you are interested in is centered in each window. Arrange the two windows (R-L or L-R) as required for your chosen viewing method and now enjoy an abundancy of details within this section in full stereo that even a full screen display simply cannot render. This is only possible if the images, as here, are provided with a relatively high resolution.
  Caveat: I know that this is, of course, not encyclopaedic information, but it may be of value for others who have difficulties viewing stereo images or for those who intend to enhance their knowledge about methods of viewing images. I have been taking stereo images for quite a number of years and would designate myself as an experienced photography amateur, now retired, with a background of astrophysics. Would it help if I extended the section Freeviewing by a concise version of "What must I do? I simply can't see any stereo effect." or similar. Who would I as a newbie have to contact ahead before adding any unwelcome text and thus possibly causing an uproar amongst a multitude of seasoned editors? My wiki experience to date is limited to some 50 image uploads to Wiki commons and, well, to this particular image as my first and singular addition to wikipedia. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 13:30, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  See your talk page, I commented there. --Janke | Talk 17:08, 20 August 2019 (UTC) - Thanks![reply]
Do you have an image with only a single flower in it? I'm thinking you can substitute the infobox image in Passiflora caerulea with such an image. Anyway, one flower in the pair has the same physical resolution and better DOF than that image. The seven day waiting period is a good idea to sit out, this is one of those topics that has a high turnover of images. If it sticks, then support. But suspend for a week first. MER-C 14:18, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @MER-C: Many thanks for your suggestion. I propose the following image, taken in June 2019: File:Passiflora-caerulea 2019-06-23 (DSC2447-1).jpg. In the past two months I have taken quite a number of Passiflora images at different angles and sizes, some of which I intend to upload soon; some are side views, some taken from underneath, and some focussed on the centre features. The Passiflora vine that produced these images is still flowering and I am continuously taking images as long as this lasts. Are you asking me to replace the existing image in Passiflora caerulea without consulting anyone ahead? OK, I have read Janke's comment on my talk page regarding addition of new content to wikipedia, and all my contributions to Wiki commons are, of course, new content, but do the same rules also apply to replacement of existing content? I emphasize that I have great respect for all those who have agreeably contributed to the Wiki universe over many years and do not want to create unnecessary antagonisms by disrespectfully ignoring any of the unwritten rules that govern which content may be replaced and which must remain. This said I deduce that a tentative entry on the corresponding "talk page" would be the correct entrée. Ok with you? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Franz van Duns (talk • contribs) 20:38, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - You don't need to ask, especially if the image is obviously better. MER-C 10:41, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - DONE: Replaced top infobox image in Passiflora caerulea with this recent high-resolution, fully frontal image: File:Passiflora_caerulea_(2019-06-24)_frontal-view.jpg.
Conditional Support per MER-C. Bammesk (talk) 01:00, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
FYI The image was added to the article on Aug. 15th, so it becomes eligible already on the 22nd. --Janke | Talk 07:19, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment on my behalf: with the clock ticking relentlessly and only just over 50 hours to go, this one last ploy on my own behalf.
This stereo image of two flowers was explicitly entered into as a Featured picture candidate for Photographic techniques, terms, and equipment, not of the individual flower I replaced on the page Passiflora caerulea, even though the depicted object certainly has its non-technical charms. It isn't perfect, no picture truely is, but the following technical considerations do give support to my entry: this image is an example of a photographic technique rarely practiced nowadays, it reproduces all colours without undue exaggeration, and it displays a tremendous amount of detail from one edge to the other, even if fully viewed at a resolution only few contemporary camera sensors can provide. Other versions supplied are a parallel-view stereo version for use with a stereoscope and also the two individual images. IMHO images of this kind enrich the technical expertise and scope of wikipedia and thus qualify for Featured picture status. Now it is up to you to comment and/or vote ... -- Franz van Duns (talk) 13:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I concur, and strike "tentative" from my post above. --Janke | Talk 18:07, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though I cannot get the stereoscopic effect to work (at any reasonable size) with something that wide, so I need to take your word for it being good. An image taller than it is wide is way easier to stereoscope. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 16:14, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- It absolutely works. Personally, I can merge cross-eyed images of up to 300 mm width at normal monitor viewing distance, but that really strains the eye muscles - and I look like Ben Turpin. This one, displayed about 150 mm wide on my setup is a cinch. YMMV... ;-) --Janke | Talk 18:10, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Passiflora caerulea STEREO (R-L) 2019-06-27.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:10, 28 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Convicts, Lunatics, and Women!

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Aug 2019 at 07:00:42 (UTC)

**Original** – Pro-women's suffrage poster by Emily J. Harding Andrews

Reason: While aspects of it are problematic, I'm a fan of history in the raw, and not trying to hide the problematic aspects of otherwise good movements. This poster is in Ableism for a reason. But it's also a fine example of a notable suffragette and artist's work, and, while we have images of suffragettes, we have very little of their propaganda, which makes it rather valuable.
Articles in which this image appears: Emily J. Harding (she usually worked under her maiden name, though not here) Disability in the United Kingdom and Ableism
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others
Creator: Emily J. Harding Andrews, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 07:00, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

If only we could prohibit lunatics from voting. – Sca (talk) 13:43, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support with context. There's a significant literature in women's history and disability history focusing on how eugenic feminism informed the suffrage movements of North America and the UK (and I assume others). It wasn't a side story; "(white) women deserve the vote more than X" was a favorite argument, and effective in times of intense racism, nativism, and ableism. This image represents an ugly but important strain of suffrage rhetoric. – Penny Richards (talk) 14:06, 19 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Incidentally, we have an article on eugenic feminism that could probably stand improvement (a while back, I put some work into making it slightly better than absolutely dreadful). XOR'easter (talk) 21:18, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – article is too weak, too short. Can it be expanded by a paragraph (or two)? It will improve the encyclopedic value. It will have my support if it is expanded a little. Bammesk (talk) 00:49, 20 August 2019 (UTC) . . . Support, I hadn't seen the second and third articles listed above. It would be nice if Emily Harding's article was a bit longer though. Bammesk (talk) 01:39, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Absolutely agree on your latter point, so I've made some additions and improvements to the article.Penny Richards (talk) 03:16, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support. MER-C 18:43, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per the high EV in not whitewashing history. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:09, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – DreamSparrow ^Chat 02:59, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:46, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support with thanks for the article additions prompted by this discussion. XOR'easter (talk) 21:14, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment special thanks to Penny Richards for additions and improvements to the article. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 20:13, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Corrected my previous "support" to "comment", as I lack the required number of Wikipedia edits, thus not yet being entitled to vote. I had mistakenly assumed I was voting for a Wiki Commons Featured picture candidate. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 12:42, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Convicts Lunatics and Women! Have No Vote for Parliament, ca. 1907-1918.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 08:26, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Crepuscular rays (2019)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Aug 2019 at 18:56:03 (UTC)

**Original** – Sunbeams over Lake Hawea, New Zealand

Reason: As it stands, this is probably the best image we have for this heavily photographed subject, and certainly is better than previously delisted FPs. Passed Commons FPC unanimously a few months ago. May replace existing FP File:Crepuscular rays at Sunset near Waterberg Plateau edit.jpg if successful. The other FP, File:Crepuscular rays in ggp 2.jpg, has found uses in illustrating the place it was taken (and should be rescoped accordingly).
Articles in which this image appears: Crepuscular rays, Sunlight
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena
Creator: Michal Klajban

Support as nominator – MER-C 18:56, 20 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's close, but I think File:Crepuscular rays in ggp 2.jpg is more encyclopaedic. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:01, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Can we distinguish crepuscular rays from clouds and crepuscular rays from nearby objects, and feature both? —David Eppstein (talk) 17:33, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:41, 25 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment According to the article Sunbeam, of which Crepuscular rays is a subsection, the depicted rays are not crepuscular rays (i.e. when the sun is below the horizon), but sunbeams (when the sun is at some point in the sky, shining through openings in clouds or between other objects). I am no expert for sunrays of any kind, and I give great trust in wikipedia's content, which accurately conforms with the statements in the following article britannica.com: crepuscular-ray. The current entanglement of usage is also prominent by this image being (a) titled "Sunbeams over Lake Hawea, New Zealand" in the Sunbeam article and (b) "Sunlight shining through clouds, giving rise to crepuscular rays" in the Sunlight article.
I really like this image as it nicely combines sunbeams and clouds of mist rising from the sea, and which, by the way, gains yet more at full resolution, and I thus would vote for full support (were I entitled - still 41 wikipedia edits to go ...).
But, and this is important, all wikipedia contributions should be as accurate as possible, which may mean rewriting incorrect captions. All taken I pledge for a new scope in the manner of Featured picture for sunbeams instead of (incorrectly attributed) crepuscular rays. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 13:29, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:30, 30 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Male black darter dragonfly (2)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2019 at 09:27:06 (UTC)

**Original** – male black darter dragonfly (*Sympetrum danae*) on Warren Heath, Hampshire

Reason: High quality large image illustrates article well. FP on Commons. 2nd nomination: received two support votes (including mine) and no opposes.
Articles in which this image appears: Sympetrum danae
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 13:26, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. DreamSparrow ^Chat 04:26, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – good photo and EV, but neutral on voting. The article has no inline citations, the refs and external links don't look substantial. Bammesk (talk) 03:24, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 06:44, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not sure this is the best dragonfly you've done, but it's certainly above the bar. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.9% of all FPs} 00:03, 27 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Black darter (Sympetrum danae) male.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:31, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sphinx moth, Adhemarius gannascus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2019 at 09:15:26 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. FP on Commons. Demonstrates how pinned specimens give a misleading idea of what the moth looks like when it’s alive.
Articles in which this image appears: Adhemarius gannascus, Adhemarius
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:15, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 13:41, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Same as Commons--BoothSiftTalks 21:30, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:27, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. DreamSparrow ^Chat 04:26, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi 06:55, 24 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Corrected "support" to "comment", as I lack the required number of Wikipedia edits, thus not yet being entitled to vote. I had mistakenly assumed I was voting for a Wiki Commons Featured picture candidate. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 12:40, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Sphinx moth (Adhemarius gannascus).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:32, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Chesterton Windmill

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2019 at 21:38:38 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image, featured picture on Wikimedia Commons. Used in the article and provides a good visual of the windmill.
Articles in which this image appears: Chesterton Windmill
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: DeFacto

Support as nominator – BoothSiftTalks 21:38, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --- Coffeeandcrumbs 23:51, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 13:11, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – Fulsomely toned target article deficient in documentation. – Sca (talk) 13:19, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Even though the the lower quarter of the image (mainly grass, but also a plaque at bottom right) is rather soft, a technical shortcoming which also applies to the tips of the windmill vanes, this image nevertheless is of extraordinary encyclopaedic value. According to the corresponding article it may be the very first windmill of its kind, and if this is the best image, then IMHO let it be the Featured picture for its kind. Caveat: Due to a lack of Wikipedia edits (currently 34), I am not entitled to vote, but I'm plodding on towards the 100 edits margin. -- Franz van Duns (talk) 12:28, 26 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I would support if some of the citation needed tags are addressed in the article. Bammesk (talk) 03:27, 29 August 2019 (UTC) . . . I added some external links. Bammesk (talk) 15:34, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:14, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:14, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sphinx moth, (Adhemarius donysa)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2019 at 21:47:54 (UTC)

Reason: Great quality, featured image on Wikimedia Commons. Shows the moth when it is alive.
Articles in which this image appears: Adhemarius donysa
FP category for this image: WP:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator: User:Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – BoothSiftTalks 21:47, 21 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 13:12, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I am leaning to oppose. The article is weak, just one line. Also there is a nice set of 4 images in the article, albeit not alive. Bammesk (talk) 03:04, 23 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:21, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:21, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pfad - The Proxy pFad of © 2024 Garber Painting. All rights reserved.