Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured candidates:
Featured picture candidates Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal things[edit]Nominating[edit]Guidelines for nominators[edit]Please read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents[edit]There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject. Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable. Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself. Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well. Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:
Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced." Photographs[edit]On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audio[edit]Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominations[edit]If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:
Simple tutorial for new users[edit]Adding a new nomination[edit]If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following. Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button. All single files: For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2
All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".
Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:
Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters. Voting[edit]Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator. A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above. Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:
This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:
If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box: In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:
After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose. Featured picture candidate policy[edit]General rules[edit]
Featuring and delisting rules[edit]A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations. The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules. Above all, be polite[edit]Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care. Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken. See also[edit]
|
Table of contents[edit]
Featured picture candidates[edit]
File:Por do Sol na Praia.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 23:48:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Sun
- Info Sunset at the Boldró Beach, Fernando de Noronha, Pernambuco, Brazil. Created and uploaded by Diagoh - nominated by ★ -- ★ 23:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ★ 23:48, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose This amount of brightness in 3/4 or so of the picture dominates this viewer's attention and interferes with his perception of the larger composition. I feel like a similar photo was nominated before, but I could be wrong. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Not wrong, as I remember it too, but can"t find it in the archives -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:HabitanteComunidadQoM(CDI-CA-MM-00005)-restored.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 22:59:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
- Info created by Anonymous - uploaded by Patriciasalatino - nominated/restored by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 21:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ezarateesteban 21:24, 24 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Do you want to wear us out? This nomination failed four days ago. Please read this discussion about early re-nominations. -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Worse than the version I was one of 5 votes to feature. Noise and artifacts, such as on his scarf. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:05, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: as per above. This failed a few days ago. Yann (talk) 09:18, 9 March 2024 (UTC) | Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. |
File:Vertumnus årstidernas gud målad av Giuseppe Arcimboldo 1591 - Skoklosters slott - 91503.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 22:39:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People
- Info created by Giuseppe Arcimboldo, uploaded and nominated by Yann
- Support Very high resolution copy of a notable painting by a museum. -- Yann (talk) 22:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ezarateesteban 23:04, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:00, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very creative painting, high resolution photo -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:17, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 09:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:King Hussain Mosque (Madaba).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 17:13:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings
- Info King Hussain Mosque (Madaba, Jordan). My shot. --Mile (talk) 17:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Mile (talk) 17:13, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Poor contrast on the top left. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice, and it seems like it's been a while since we had a mosque interior nominated here. In theory, I might want slightly broader left and right crops. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:37, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good quality with a high level of detail but the composition is average, in my view, and the subject unspectacular. Too busy, obstructed windows, average crop at the bottom, and unappealing light, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:40, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Info More enlighted and vibrance added. --Mile (talk) 10:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC) p.S. @Ikan Kekek Maybe next time, i find play of circles nice.
File:Bust of Ibn Khaldun (Casbah of Bejaia, Algeria).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 13:18:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures_outdoors
- Info created by Reda Kerbouche , uploaded by Reda Kerbouche , nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 13:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 13:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I like this photo, but I think it's important for us to know who the sculptor is and how long ago they made the sculpture. Per Commons:Copyright rules by territory/Algeria: "Pictorial and applied art works are protected for 50 years from creation." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:17, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hi @Ikan Kekek, the work is also under the FoP-Algeria licence; the sculpture is in a public place called Casbah de Béjaïa. Regards. Riad Salih (talk) 22:43, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oh, it's an exterior. Thanks. I do think the sculptor's name is needed for FP, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Ruppur Nuclear Power Plant , Ruppur, Pabna.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 06:11:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers
- Info created by Sanvi Ahmed Saim - uploaded by Sanvi Ahmed Saim - nominated by Wasiul Bahar -- Wasiul Bahar (talk) 06:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Blinding lights. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose The small image looks quite good but the quality is not good enough for FP I think.--Ermell (talk) 19:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Bust of Germanicus, front - Getty Museum (2021.66).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 00:23:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues_indoors
- Info created by J. Paul Getty Museum - uploaded by DEGA MD - nominated by DEGA MD -- DEGA MD (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- DEGA MD (talk) 00:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support The gray background is a bit posterized, but what a huge, detailed reproduction of the bust! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:39, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:59, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 14:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Sorry for commenting after having expressed my support, that of course I maintain. Why didn't you nominated a set? Whit some of thiese views: right front, right back or left front, for instance? Anyhow, thanks for all of them. Very impressive! --Harlock81 (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- I should have definitely considered it but I wasn't really familiar with the process as it's my first nomination. I guess if this one is successful I'll nominate some of the other views as a set. Thanks for the advice! --DEGA MD (talk) 18:40, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Sorry for commenting after having expressed my support, that of course I maintain. Why didn't you nominated a set? Whit some of thiese views: right front, right back or left front, for instance? Anyhow, thanks for all of them. Very impressive! --Harlock81 (talk) 14:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Sets have to be complete, not "some of the other views". Have a look at Commons:Featured picture candidates#Set nominations above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:11, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 14:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:34, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 10:49, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:04, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:SNTF Class 060DS.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2024 at 00:10:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
- Info created by Alfred Alreness - uploaded by Riad Salih - nominated by Riad Salih -- Riad Salih (talk) 00:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 00:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Very noticeable chromatic aberration, noise and unsharpness. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:41, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:01, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- chromatic aberration Too --Wilfredor (talk) 17:28, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:19, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Raising a flag over the Reichstag.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2024 at 23:50:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1940-1949
- Info created by Yevgeny Khaldei - uploaded by Yann - nominated by TheFreeWorld -- TheFreeWorld
- Support -- TheFreeWorld (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
Support Very striking historical photo. This was a newspaper photo, right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:35, 8 March 2024 (UTC)- Oppose Tremendously grainy, poor focus and low depth of field. I don't mind the tilt, but the quality is not up to the FP standards for this period, even for action shots. Compare with 1, 2 or 3, for example.
- Destructive digital processing with excessive contrasts, harsh blacks and whites and a significant loss of nuances in the grays. See the difference with the original, or these online versions. Question Where is the source offering this resolution? -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:19, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Thanks. The original is better, so I've changed my vote to opposing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per both of your remarks. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:02, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Thanks. The original is better, so I've changed my vote to opposing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I didn't edit this file, only uploaded as it was. Yann (talk) 09:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment (1) Agree with Basile’s assessment of the digital processing of the current upload. Shouldn’t we revert this file to the original version uploaded by Yann? It’s not perfect, but much better than this coarse editing. (2) Could we please list Adam’s restauration File:Raising a flag over the Reichstag - Restoration.jpg as an alternative here? Best, --Aristeas (talk) 19:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Done. I reverted this, and added Adam’s restauration as alternative. Yann (talk) 22:29, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you very much, Yann! Weak support for this (original) version, as I prefer the restored one. --Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Done. I reverted this, and added Adam’s restauration as alternative. Yann (talk) 22:29, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment This unrestored image would be good enough to feature, in my opinion, if we didn't have the restored alternative. If others decide they prefer this version, I'll cross out my opposing vote, but I do favor the restoration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:49, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Alt[edit]
- Support Better. Yann (talk) 22:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 23:18, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support The restoration improved the photo, as usual. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:47, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:58, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Improved, thank you, Adam. --Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 09:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 09:39, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Blanche Roosevelt by Mora.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2024 at 17:13:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1870-1879
- Info created by José Maria Mora restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:13, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support This picture really has a special feeling, thanks for restoring it! --Kritzolina (talk) 21:10, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- You're quite welcome! Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:48, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Agreed. Excellent photo and restoration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:50, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 10:00, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 14:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:23, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Delicate photograph, excellent restauration. --Aristeas (talk) 19:22, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:30, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:03, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Kama River. Nizhnekamsk Hydroelectric Station. Gateway canal P6211279 2575.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2024 at 01:39:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Russia
- Info I think the sunset lighting really draws attention to the rust on the barrier and the machinery, and gives the sense of ruggedness against the elements. The composition is IMO really good, and the fact that the three cranes are different colours adds something. created by Alexxx1979 - uploaded by Alexxx1979 - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice,--Famberhorst (talk) 17:53, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support The varying colours, the rusty air of decay and the light make this photo beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 19:43, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Special moment of the day. This picture is showing me that even the worst industrial structure can become aesthetically pleasing with a golden light, enhancing the colours. Apart from the minor part of the building oddly cropped at the left, the composition is okay in my opinion. Also per Aristeas -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:09, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:24, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:01, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Alberto Santos-Dumont b Meurisse 1922.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 18:21:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1920-1929
- Info Alberto Santos-Dumont (1873-1932), Brazilian aviation pioneer. Picture taken in 1922: glass negative, restored and cropped print. Created by Agence de presse Meurisse - uploaded, stiched and restored by JLPC - nominated by ★ -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Three inventors in a row! -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good portrait. Yann (talk) 18:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Part of his face is blown. I don't think that was inevitable in 1922. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Notwithstanding Ikan's valid point, I like his expression, it's characterful, and it's hardly like we can go back and get a better picture of him Cmao20 (talk) 00:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Bad photocopy aspect. Too contrasted with strong blacks and blown highlights, sorry. Moreover, focus is on the tie, not on the head -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- I withdraw my nomination ★ 23:42, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Wright brothers[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 18:21:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
-
Orville Wright, age 34, head and shoulders, with mustache
-
Wilbur Wright, age 38, head and shoulders.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1900-1909
- Info Wright brothers in 1905. They were American aviation pioneers generally credited with inventing, building, and flying the world's first successful airplane. Created by Orville Wright and Wilbur Wright (credited as photographers [1] [2]) - uploaded by Scewing - nominated by ★ -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- ★ 18:21, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Nice duo. Yann (talk) 18:59, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 20:24, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Another image from Brazilian friends group --Wilfredor (talk) 21:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support The photo of Orville is the sharper one, but they are both quite good, especially for their time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Funny that I had no idea what these two fascinating men actually looked like. Cmao20 (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Sorry to dissent when ArionStar considers the set already promoted after just one day of voting :-) (FYI it is not rare at FPC to meet this kind of scheme, or more frequently that one).
- Here, the first picture is okay, but not the second one. And I don't think Wilbur Wright, age 38 would gain so many supports if nominated alone.
- The focus is on the ear, not on the eyes. Face, nose and mouth are too blurry.
- I may support Orville Wright, age 34, if nominated alone -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:28, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:08, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:29, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:59, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Southern armyworm (Spodoptera eridania), eggs 2014-06-06-14.28.04 ZS PMax - USGS BIML.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 13:06:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Noctuidae_(Owlet_Moths)
- Info created by USGS - uploaded by Jacopo Werther - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- shizhao (talk) 13:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- I'm still thinking about this photo, but I'd like to add some important information from w:Spodoptera eridania: These eggs are really small. "Eggs measure about 0.45 mm in diameter and 0.35 mm in height." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:23, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 00:24, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support I think it could be argued that the crops in this picture are rather random, but it's really interesting and detailed, and the eggs are pretty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan,--Famberhorst (talk) 17:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. – Aristeas (talk) 19:40, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan. DEGA MD (talk) 17:45, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:28, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:57, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Child herding cattle in the street.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 12:48:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Bovidae_(Bovids)
- Info 12 years ago, when there was still hope of having a free country, children running around herding cattle to eat, a common scene in the streets of Carapacho, Margarita Island. This type of common scene but it makes me nostalgic for the town where I come from and one day I plan to return. All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 12:48, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Maybe not obviously wowing, but I like the sense of motion in it, which I think is the final element that makes the already good composition really work. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:19, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Will, eu adicionei uma sugestão de corte, excluindo o animal que está parcialmente fora da imagem, o que acha? ★ 00:21, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- fica muito comprimido Wilfredor (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Very bad light. You see the shadows? The midday sun comes from in front. Washed out colors with a blue tint.
- The animals are fleeing, captured from behind, as if the photographer was scaring them. So the composition is not appealing at all, sorry.
- Ugly building in the background, and too tight crop at the right, animal cut out at the left. ArionStar's crop suggestion will result in a tight crop at the left too -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- the presence of buildings that you perceive as 'ugly' is representative of the common architecture in many underdeveloped areas, along with the living conditions and daily environment on Margarita Island. This place, located in the Caribbean, experiences intense vertical sunlight that naturally produces strong shadows and high contrast in images. Additionally, capturing animals in flight is done intentionally to lead them to the feeder, offering a perspective on natural interaction in their habitat Wilfredor (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ugly industrial building, if you prefer. But the main problem here is this facade clutters the background, making the image too busy.
- Contre-jour with dull light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:44, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- the presence of buildings that you perceive as 'ugly' is representative of the common architecture in many underdeveloped areas, along with the living conditions and daily environment on Margarita Island. This place, located in the Caribbean, experiences intense vertical sunlight that naturally produces strong shadows and high contrast in images. Additionally, capturing animals in flight is done intentionally to lead them to the feeder, offering a perspective on natural interaction in their habitat Wilfredor (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Bad crop. Only seeing that cattle on the left's arse is not what I expect for an FP. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Done Please, let me know what do you think. Thanks Wilfredor (talk) 12:10, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Heavily manipulated image, and, as usual, no {{Retouched}} template (like here, there, etc.) -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- I added comments in the file history because I found it more clear, however I added the retouched template too. thanks. "Heavily manipulated image" is subjective and a common practice in FPC, see [3] and [4] Wilfredor (talk) 13:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Common practice by you, maybe. Although I recognize you are capable of manipulating much more -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:01, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- The issues mentioned by Basile also still remain. --SHB2000 (talk) 20:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Heavily manipulated image, and, as usual, no {{Retouched}} template (like here, there, etc.) -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:58, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Bad crop per SHB2000 --PierreSelim (talk) 11:40, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
Nemocardium bechei[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 08:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page
-
Right valve
-
Left valve
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Cardiidae
- Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 08:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Llez (talk) 08:47, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Excellent, as usual. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:22, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Your shells are amazing Cmao20 (talk) 00:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Ermell (talk) 11:29, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Mile (talk) 11:41, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:04, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:57, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:39, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:10, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Синиця. Кам’яний міст.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 08:06:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Ukraine
- Info Park, lake and stone bridge - park-monument of landscape art and architectural heritage of national importance of Ukraine.
All by -- Nikride (talk) 08:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Nikride (talk) 08:06, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Not spectacular in my opinion, and I think the gallery is less Bridges (too small in the picture) than Reflections -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Basile. Peaceful and pleasant but not extraordinary. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Neutral The colour balance is a bit too warm to me, but if that were altered I think this could be FP Cmao20 (talk) 00:18, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose Missing something special here. Also per my comment left yesterday. Perhaps in Autumn, when the trees are of different colors, the scenery would be more impressive -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Vrucht van een paardenkastanje (Aesculus) 01-03-2024 (d.j.b.).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 05:33:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Sapindaceae
- Info Fruit of a Horse-chestnut still in a half cocoon of which the fragile sprout has already reached mother earth. Focus stack of 23 photos. (Diameter sprout ~5 mm.)
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 05:33, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support interesting --Mile (talk) 11:42, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yes, interesting and well photographed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:34, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Indeed; high educational value. --Aristeas (talk) 19:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great sharpness and colors. DEGA MD (talk) 00:32, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:12, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 09:42, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Frozen soap bubble behind fir twigs (Unsplash BojuZpqw4zM).jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2024 at 04:49:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Ice
- Info Created by Aaron Burden aaronburden - uploaded by Fæ - nominated by Junior Jumper -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:49, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Wow! That's great. Yann (talk) 10:12, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Not for me as an FP composition, he has taken many better, but very clever. This is how he does it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:16, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Impressive and interesting technique Cmao20 (talk) 00:17, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support FP, period. ★ 00:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Fæ = Tæ? ★ 00:33, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Well, there are only so many two-letter usernames you can have. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:30, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Quite good to me. Charles, if you've seen other photos of frozen bubbles that you liked more, it would be great if you nominated some. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment The file name is not ok per Commons standard, there is no real description (ok, I can fix that) and the categories were wrong and way off until I fixed them. Even the most obvious one, Category:Frozen soap bubbles, was missing. Instead it was listed as a "glass sphere"! #%&"!! – doesn't anyone check this these days??? New users here get a hard time for not fixing the galleries, but veteran FPC-ers gladly vote without checking the bare essentials on noms, leaving it to those who take care of categories and "behind the scene"-work. Please lift your eyes from the pixel-peeping and read the checklist of requirements for FPCs when you vote. --Cart (talk) 13:52, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Thank you for the wake-up call, Cart ;–). And thank you, really, for fixing the weird categories. (I tought they may have been added by some pupil or by somebody with poor knowledge of the English language, but actually people holding a PhD in natural science add such categories. Wow!) I have taken the liberty to rename the file (and this nomination) to something more useful. Hope it helps, --Aristeas (talk) 09:25, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:27, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Im Naturwaldreservat Wildacker 15.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2024 at 12:13:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
- Info Lovely photo of a Bavarian forest, I love how the path is placed slightly off centre and how it and the shapes of the trees act as subtle leading lines, and the way that the tree canopy has grown together gives the image an almost fairytale atmosphere. created by Plozessor - uploaded by Plozessor - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:13, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Bavaria redminds me of this game. ★ 16:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Wondering if the trees are naturally leaning in, or if it is an effect of the bottom-up angle of view -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- It's very common to see this with kissing canopies; maybe the same might apply here, too? I'm no biologist. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I think, perspective correction is necessary --Llez (talk) 08:40, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, if you tilt it -25°, it looks more natural. -- -donald- (talk) 07:37, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I find it plausible that it actually looked like this, per SHB2000's comment, but even if it didn't, personally I don't think perspective correction is necessary here. Shooting from a bottom-up position to emphasise the height of the trees and how the path feels fully enclosed by them on all sides, i.e. the density of the forest, is a reasonable decision to me. Cmao20 (talk) 00:16, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:35, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:37, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 19:34, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 20:05, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Tribu Laarim, Kimotong, Sudán del Sur, 2024-01-24, DD 121.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2024 at 07:01:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
- Info Portrait of young woman from the Laarim Tribe, Kimotong, Kapoeta State, South Sudan. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 07:01, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Question Staged image; watered face, too much jewelry...? I see they ofer photo excursions for African womens. Then bunch of Western horde is making "pure Africa". Black back isnt helpfull here, where is Saharan desert. --Mile (talk) 08:55, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, it is a portrait and therefore she posed. That's not water, which is rare, but rather sweat. Too much jewelry? well, that's the way this tribe dress, that's how it is. Regarding the other comments, I'd only take them seriosly if you were somebody who has experienced such a trip once (which is obviously not the case based on what you write). Poco a poco (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support This is posed, but still a good portrait, compared to what we already have. Yann (talk) 09:19, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I do like the composition, but the image should mention artificial black background. Quite a lot of work needed to correct background errors around neck and earrings. See notes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
-
- Charlesjsharp, Basile Morin: there is no artificial background here. We used a black sheet, I just darkened it a bit so that it's uniform. --Poco a poco (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC) PD: Thanks for the notes, fill fix them this evening.
-
- Support nice composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:22, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Yann, I don't mind that it is staged. Correcting some of the background errors would improve the image further. Cmao20 (talk) 12:07, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good portrait. Posed portraits are normal and totally fine; I don't understand the objection. I see a few hot pixels to the right of the yellow beads above her breasts. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Gone, I had fixed it but the upload of the last version didn't work. Not it's there. Poco a poco (talk) 19:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very aesthetic portrait. Looks like a hotpixel on the belly, but could also be a piece of the necklace. Does the lady have a name?--Ermell (talk) 20:04, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Yeah, I do see a red hot pixel on her belly, now that you mentioned it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:06, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Hot pixel removed, thanks. Ermell, surely she has a name, but we had that afternoon dozens of models, I cannot tell you. On the other side, they don't know how old they are, there is no documentation of that, no calendars, nothing like that. Poco a poco (talk) 22:17, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Interesting and excellent quality with a high level of detail. Scarification is particularly impressive -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:28, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Indeed, a dangerous beauty ideal, indeed. They all had a significant amount of scarification, but some of them much more than this one. Poco a poco (talk) 07:56, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:39, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --GRDN711 (talk) 14:15, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan and Basile. --Aristeas (talk) 19:32, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Pacific gull (Larus pacificus pacificus) Freycinet.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 21:52:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus : Larus
- Info 33 gull FPs (too many), but none of this species with its massive bill. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Tight crop, left side. --Mile (talk) 08:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- easily sorted if there is consensus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:26, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- True, add more on left, and crop above a bit. I think 2/3 rule could be avoided for eye, too much blue. --Mile (talk) 10:12, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Light and background -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:00, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Maybe a tiny bit too dark. But excellent and clearly FP Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 01:02, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Good image - certainly QI and VI but IMHO not enough wow for FP. --GRDN711 (talk) 14:12, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Farmer walking in dust storm Cimarron County Oklahoma2.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 15:56:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1930-1939
- Info created by Arthur Rothstein, restored and uploaded by Mvuijlst, nominated by Yann
- Support High quality copy of a notable picture. FP on English WP. -- Yann (talk) 15:56, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 16:44, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support I love the man expression to the children --Wilfredor (talk) 19:57, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --GRDN711 (talk) 20:39, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:03, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:38, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:52, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good find, thank you, Yann. – Because this is a 1936 photograph and because we have already two similar photos in the Historical#1930-1939 section, I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link to that. (Hope this is OK, else let’s discuss it.) --Aristeas (talk) 19:30, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Claude Debussy by Atelier Nadar.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 14:05:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1890-1899
- Info created by Nadar - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:05, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:05, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Good picture of one of my favorite composers, but please talk us through your thought process in shifting the photo from reddish to yellowish-green. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:27, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- For whatever reason, this is one of those images that changes colours once you download the image. Compare https://gallica.bnf.fr/ark:/12148/btv1b53118843k/f1 I just pushed it towards standard Nadar-image colours a bit. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support, then. Thanks for the explanation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:37, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:50, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support God picture very well executed restoration --Wilfredor (talk) 14:08, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support per Ikan and Wilfredor. --Aristeas (talk) 19:25, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:56, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:TCDD E 68 072 Yeşilhisar - Araplı.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 10:20:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
- Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Ivar (talk) 10:20, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Quality there as usual, but the artificially built up track is not very pretty. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Not his best but there's still enough here for FP with the interesting surroundings and the colourful train Cmao20 (talk) 12:05, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 08:36, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Charles. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:20, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 05:48, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Ostracod3.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 07:01:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Class : Ostracoda (Ostracods)
- Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Janeklass (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support The species should be identified, at least to the genus level. --Cayambe (talk) 11:53, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Amazing, but I can't support until the correct gallery is added. Cmao20 (talk) 12:03, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- The right gallery should be: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods. Then, a new subsection should be created for the "Class : Ostracoda (Ostracod)" in the section about the Subphylum: Crustacea. No order or family have been identified, if I'm not wrong. --Harlock81 (talk) 11:02, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Done, as this looks very convincing to me, and updated the gallery link above accordingly. Any objections or suggestions for further refinements? --Aristeas (talk) 19:22, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- The right gallery should be: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods. Then, a new subsection should be created for the "Class : Ostracoda (Ostracod)" in the section about the Subphylum: Crustacea. No order or family have been identified, if I'm not wrong. --Harlock81 (talk) 11:02, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes, we do need the genus (and correct nomination process). Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:22, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Harlock81 (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Kruusamägi (talk) 21:30, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Hydracarina2.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2024 at 06:52:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Others
- Info created by Janeklass - uploaded by Janeklass - nominated by Janeklass -- Janeklass (talk) 06:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Janeklass (talk) 06:52, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Kruusamägi (talk) 11:44, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support The species should be identified, at least to the family or genus level. --Cayambe (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Yes, we do need the genus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:24, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:55, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Kasteel Tarasp (Tarasp Castle) Scuol, 18-09-2023. (actm.) 01.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2024 at 05:17:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Fences and railings
- Info Tarasp Castle Scuol, in Lower Engadin, Graubünden (Fencing) A rustic fence in a beautiful September atmosphere.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC) - Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:17, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:35, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:02, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:53, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Nice but not spectacular to me. There are some good compositional elements, but the overall composition isn't really special to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:21, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I concur, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 22:18, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 15:29, 5 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Average composition, unappealing sky, sorry. The plastic mesh on the right is also quite ugly at full size. Perhaps if the background had been more discernable, the picture would have gained something special, but currently it is neither an extraordinary subject, in my view, nor an exceptional view point -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:46, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support There is just some charm and mood to this image that cannot be explained in words. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:31, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 16:01, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Galería Humberto I, Nápoles, Italia, 2023-03-25, DD 157-159 HDR.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2024 at 08:10:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery:
Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#ItalyCommons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Glass ceilings and skylights - Info Galleria Umberto I, Naples, Italy. It was built between 1887 and 1890, and was the cornerstone in the decades-long rebuilding of Naples—called the risanamento (lit. "making healthy again")—that lasted until World War I. It was designed in the Stile Umbertino by Emanuele Rocco, who employed modern architectural elements reminiscent of the Galleria Vittorio Emanuele II in Milan. The Galleria was named after Umberto I, King of Italy at the time of construction. It was meant to combine businesses, shops, cafés and social life—public space—with private space in the apartments on the third floor. The building is part of the UNESCO listing of the Historic Centre of Naples as a World Heritage Site. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 08:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:10, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Lots of CA. Gallery was once again wrong, yeah sure... --A.Savin 12:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thank you, lucky me that you cannot handcuff me for that :) Poco a poco (talk) 16:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC) PD: I removed the CA.
- A.Savin: is there anything else I can do to get your support or at least not to get your oppose? --Poco a poco (talk) 19:19, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ok, I give up after 3 pings. I just had the hope that the negative vote had something to do with the candidate image and its improvements. No further comment. Poco a poco (talk) 20:12, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Yellow is still there. On right side of hemisphere.--Mile (talk) 19:11, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Absolutely stellar photo with a real wow factor and huge resolution Cmao20 (talk) 01:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:24, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It looks to me like there's still some red CA on the upper part of the picture frame. Otherwise very well captured, and a nice place. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:46, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Ikan Kekek: New version with more CA removal, FYI, too A.Savin Poco a poco (talk) 08:38, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks. Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:51, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Ermell (talk) 09:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:34, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 20:28, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:57, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Wilfredor (talk) 14:07, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:14, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Cape Barren goose (Cereopsis novaehollandiae) Kangaroo Island.jpg[edit]
Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2024 at 17:57:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Cereopsis
- Info We have just promoted an FP of the species in flight. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Why do you think these obscured feet are ok, when this and this were not. --Cart (talk) 21:36, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- I can see the foot. There is no blurred foreground as in one of your examples and no huge rock as in the other. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:42, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- By 'foot', do you mean that small part of a toe sticking out from behind the little pile of dirt, or am I missing something. --Cart (talk) 10:02, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think so. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:00, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- I don't think Cart is missing anything, either. I'll Support because I think this deserves a feature, but some more consistency from you on obscured feet and toes would be appreciated. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:25, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
Underexposed-- Basile Morin (talk) 03:19, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Brighter version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support fine, now -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --SHB2000 (talk) 05:45, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Composition, need some crop right-above. That tree behind which cross neck could be solved, now gray on gray. --Mile (talk) 09:24, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- It does not need a crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:46, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Something like this would be more suitable. Will erase in hour. --Mile (talk) 10:48, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support More than fine for me Cmao20 (talk) 01:06, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Too much sharpening IMHO, the image looks detached from the background due to the sharpening halos. Poco a poco (talk) 08:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:23, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 15:56, 4 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Zofenhof Augsburg.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2024 at 09:28:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Others
- Info created &uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:28, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Comment No description? Only one category? -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:18, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Thanks for the description, but not specific enough in my opinion. And why this first line? (Seems misplaced to me). Also it's still poorly categorized. See COM:I. You should find something with arches, windows, benches, number 3, etc. -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Striking and beautiful, but, per Basile, more categories + proper description would be nice Cmao20 (talk) 01:05, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Very tight crop, specially at the bottom, but overall it deserves the start IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 08:19, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:21, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Weak oppose per cmt -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:11, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Basile, and also, I know photographers tend to really like these kinds of compositions, but this one kind of sits there and is not inspiring to me, partly, I think, because there's so much undifferentiated wall. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:50, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Per Basile Morin. -- Karelj (talk) 11:17, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose per Ikan and Basile. I find this composition a bit too repetitive and boring, FWIW. --SHB2000 (talk) 07:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support Good example for “a matter of taste” ;–). I really like the composition, just the left/right crop is a bit too tight (which was certainly hard to avoid, given how little space there is in the Zofenhof). --Aristeas (talk) 14:03, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support I like the thoughtful arrangement of the elements in the picture. Well done Riad Salih (talk) 00:20, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:54, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Veronica Lake still.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 23:32:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1950-1959
- Info Actress Veronica Lake - uploaded by Pefp - edited by Dmitry Rozhkov - nominated by --Thi (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support -- Thi (talk) 23:32, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It's a striking photo, but was it enlarged just for the sake of enlargement? Do we know how big the original print was? Tragic life story. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:25, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Not very large, and there are larger copies on the Net, i.e. [5], and Alamy. Yann (talk) 12:07, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Only 1,614 × 2,000 pixels. Not an exceptional size compared to similar pictures of the same period. Thus not a FP for me, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Veronica Lake still 2.jpg[edit]
- Info Veronica Lake - larger version uploaded and nominated by --Thi (talk) 14:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Thi (talk) 14:11, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support JukoFF (talk) 15:08, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support --GRDN711 (talk) 21:02, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 21:30, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Good, but again, do you know how big the original print was? Or is that the wrong question? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Only 1,614 × 2,000 pixels. Not an exceptional size compared to similar pictures of the same period. Thus not a FP for me, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:15, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support I find 2120×3000 here. I suppose if this is OK with license we can take that biger. --Mile (talk) 09:34, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- It is cropped on the left. --Thi (talk) 10:51, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose There are better pictures of her, i.e. File:Veronica Lake still, Paramount Pictures.jpg, just uploaded. This one needs some cleaning. Yann (talk) 12:16, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:33, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Dorothy Anstett, Miss USA, 1968-bluish tint fix attempt.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 19:35:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1960-1969
- Info created by Bernard Gotfryd, restored and uploaded by Yann and Brandmeister, nominated by Yann
- Support -- Yann (talk) 19:35, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose Tell me which is more sharp and have film color tones... [6] which has 669 × 991 px or this. Could you please revert to 2nd option of GRuban, since you have now seperate nominee and that one best. In any case i cant support, adding px is unworthy here. -Mile (talk) 20:06, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- @PetarM: "adding px"? You don't know what you are talking about. This version is made from the high resolution TIFF file. Of course, the downsampled version may be sharper. Yann (talk) 21:39, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support as the other version looks unnaturally bluish (not to mention original tiff). Brandmeister (talk) 21:00, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 20:12, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:03, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Llez (talk) 10:20, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:29, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support This raw render work to me, look like typical 60s Kodak palette --Wilfredor (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support IMHO the colours are now authentic for film of that time. --Aristeas (talk) 13:22, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I took the liberty to change the gallery link from People/Portrait to Historical/People#1960-1969; as the comment on People/Portrait says, “This gallery is for color head to half-lenght photographs […] of people from 1970 or later. For portrait photographs […] from 1969 or earlier, please use Historical portrait photos or Black and White portraits.” --Aristeas (talk) 13:56, 7 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment I dunno: A blueish tint in the shadows of a shot taken on daylight-balanced film is to be expected. Adjusting the facade in the background towards neutral grey is not the way to go here, imho. --El Grafo (talk) 09:15, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- There wouldn't be such tint in modern photos under the same lighting conditions which to me suggests it's a thing of older technology that can be adjusted. Various digitized photos from that period have similar tint. Brandmeister (talk) 16:50, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Yes, but IMHO in this version the shadows are still bluish enough; in the original the bluish tint was exaggerated – either a poor film was used, or it was not processed correctly in the lab. Of course everything depends on the film type used for the photograph, as different daylight films handled colours quite differently, even in the 1990s when I shot on film. It’s a pity that scans of old photographs almost never include information about the film. If they would just include the border of the transparency (often naming the film brand), we would know more. – Aristeas (talk) 20:03, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
File:Triumph of St. Ignatius of Loyola, ceiling fresco by Andrea Pozzo.jpg[edit]
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2024 at 15:53:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Italy
- Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 15:53, 28 February 2024 (UTC)
- Support Maybe a bit dark compared to the other FPs but very good quality.--Ermell (talk) 23:06, 29 February 2024 (UTC)
- This was the real light and colors at that time, this is a dark church. Wilfredor (talk) 00:54, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support ★ 00:05, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 03:29, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 05:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment Left side, anoted, should that line be straight ? Painting of edge of wall. --Mile (talk) 09:27, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- This is not a real column but a painting, looking at other photos makes me conclude that it is a perspective effect created by the artist to simulate depth Wilfredor (talk) 11:50, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Oppose I don't like the dark lower-right corner area. Btw, gallery was wrong. --A.Savin 12:59, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support somehow--Mile (talk) 19:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Do you mean somewow? Wilfredor (talk) 19:20, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support A bit dark, but sharp. --Harlock81 (talk) 20:09, 1 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Sterling work, lots of beautiful details Cmao20 (talk) 01:03, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Comment It's overall too dark. It could be that the weather was very casted, but to appreciate the details it should be brightened. Please, crop more at the bottom to improve symmetry. Poco a poco (talk) 08:25, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- This was really dark, I remember taking a few minutes to take a photo of the ceiling and then when I looked down I was completely blinded by the darkness, I had to wait another few minutes to be able to leave without bumping into anyone. I have cropped the image for better symmetry and also raised the exposure just a little. Please tell me what you think Wilfredor (talk) 13:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 22:12, 3 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Good for me. As this is a church ceiling, IMHO the gallery for ceilings of religious buildings is even more appropriate, so I have taken the liberty to adjust the gallery link. --Aristeas (talk) 13:20, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
- Support Great sharpness and colors. DEGA MD (talk) 00:38, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
- Weak support The lower-right black corner create some disturbance however it can be neglected.--Junior Jumper (talk) 10:49, 8 March 2024 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]
Mon 04 Mar → Sat 09 Mar Tue 05 Mar → Sun 10 Mar Wed 06 Mar → Mon 11 Mar Thu 07 Mar → Tue 12 Mar Fri 08 Mar → Wed 13 Mar Sat 09 Mar → Thu 14 Mar
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]
Thu 29 Feb → Sat 09 Mar Fri 01 Mar → Sun 10 Mar Sat 02 Mar → Mon 11 Mar Sun 03 Mar → Tue 12 Mar Mon 04 Mar → Wed 13 Mar Tue 05 Mar → Thu 14 Mar Wed 06 Mar → Fri 15 Mar Thu 07 Mar → Sat 16 Mar Fri 08 Mar → Sun 17 Mar Sat 09 Mar → Mon 18 Mar
Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]
The bot[edit]
Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.
Manual procedure[edit]
Any experienced user may close requests.
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
featured or not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured === - Save your edit.
- If it is featured:
- Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
- Also add the picture to the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
- Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
- If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
- If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
- Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
- The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
- You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
- Add == FP promotion ==
{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
- As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Closing a delisting request[edit]
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
'''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg) - Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
delisted or not delisted
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted === - Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2024.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
- Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
- Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
- If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination[edit]
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured === - Save your edit.
- Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.