Other featured candidates
📽️ Media
Featured picture candidates ![]() Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. | |||||||||||||||||||
Formal thingsNominatingGuidelines for nominatorsPlease read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documentsThere are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject. Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the 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." PhotographsOn the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audioPlease nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominationsIf a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:
Simple tutorial for new usersAdding a new nominationIf you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate name, quality, image description, categories 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. VotingEditors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator. A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above. Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidatesOver time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:
This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:
If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box: In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:
After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the 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 policyGeneral rules
Featuring and delisting rulesA candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules. Above all, be politePlease don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care. Happy judging… and remember… all rules can be broken. See also
|
Table of contents
Featured picture candidates
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2025 at 18:54:34 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Bones and fossils#Family : Bovidae
Info created by Arthur Rothstein, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann
Info Dry and parched earth in the badlands of South Dakota, May 1936. Part of The Bitter Years exhibition at the Museum of Modern Art, New York, 1962.
Support -- Yann (talk) 18:54, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2025 at 17:05:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Sweden
Info Förbindelsgången (The connecting passage) was built in 1912 to connect the different parts of the Stockholm slaughterhouse that had been constructed a few years earlier. When it was built, it was one of the world's most modern slaughterhouses and meat-packing districts. Today, the building is protected as a cultural heritage site. The photo was taken on a cloudy day with low contrast, using a normal lens to create a realistic image without exposure fusion or wide-angle distortion. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- ArildV (talk) 17:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:29, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment I will be happy to support, if you manage to find at least one more fitting category. The where is kind of hidden in the what - but the when definitely is missing. --Kritzolina (talk) 17:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- You have a point @Kritzolina: . Some kind users have already added several categories (thanks!). Category:Enskede slakthus also contains many categories (architect, building type, location).--ArildV (talk) 17:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- It now have two different 'when' categories and the 'what' and 'where' are in its parent category Enskede slakthus. Adding more on the file would be overcat. --Cart (talk) 17:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Thank you all, now I can support with good conscience. --Kritzolina (talk) 18:36, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support A tiny hint of CA but compo is great. --Cart (talk) 17:59, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you. I increased the purple defringing by 2 steps.--ArildV (talk) 18:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support - The passageway has beautiful "bones". - ERcheck (talk) 18:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good! Юрий Д.К 19:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:29, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2025 at 15:53:08 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info created, uploaded and nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 15:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 15:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good! Юрий Д.К 19:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2025 at 15:49:41 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Italy
Info created – uploaded – nominated by Berthold Werner -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Neutral -- Berthold Werner (talk) 15:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Sorry but not an outstanding composition for me. Very scenic view but composition is a bit random, like a snapshot, and the boat on the left is cropped awkwardly. I am not sure the beautiful landscape and coastline can do enough to elevate a fairly ordinary photo to FP. Cmao20 (talk) 16:17, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment I definitely would ask for a better file name before supporting. Although I am not sure if I want to support yet, for all the reasons Cmao mentioned. But please don't rename now during the nomination, just let us know what more descriptive file name you would choose. --Kritzolina (talk) 17:36, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support FP for me Юрий Д.К 19:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Slightly too bright but still o.k.--Ermell (talk) 20:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2025 at 13:56:41 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Odonata#Family : Gomphidae (Clubtails)
Info We have one FP of a green-eyed male of a different subspecies. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent IMHO--Berthold Werner (talk) 15:51, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Big wow for me, and very high resolution and detail Cmao20 (talk) 16:13, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 16:43, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 19:06, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:10, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2025 at 12:42:13 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical/People#1940-1949
Info created by Dogad75 – uploaded by Dogad75 – nominated by Elshad Iman -- E.IMANCOMMONS 12:42, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Good portrait of a notable individual -- E.IMANCOMMONS 12:42, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry but low resolution and poor image quality (largely not sharp, JPEG artefacts, and strangely noisy but only on bits of the face) Cmao20 (talk) 16:15, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Oppose per Cmao20. Also no English description, only used on Wikidata. Very far to be FP level. Yann (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination-- E.IMANCOMMONS 16:55, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I have no issue with my rationale for my own FP nom being used here, but the portrait is clearly AI 'restored', and not high quality. JayCubby (talk) 16:58, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 29 Jun 2025 at 04:44:52 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae
Info Hippeastrum houseplant. The delicate beauty of the flower whose stamens have yet to grow outwards. Focus stack of 15 photos.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:44, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:49, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:50, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Good wow factor and file documentation. (Studio photos are excluded from the recommendation of geolocation because of privacy issues.) --Cart (talk) 17:15, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good! Юрий Д.К 19:06, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 21:50:41 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 21:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 21:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice angle Cmao20 (talk) 00:30, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:50, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:01, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 19:06, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 21:46:01 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Hautes-Pyrénées
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 21:46, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 21:46, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Austere beauty Cmao20 (talk) 00:29, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:48, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:02, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:42, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 18:09, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good! Юрий Д.К 19:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 20:50:27 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family : Pomacentridae (Clownfish and Damselfish)
Info Pacific sergeant major (Abudefduf troschelii), Cabo San Lucas, Baja California, Mexico. This species of damselfish can be found in shallow water coral reefs in the Eastern Pacific Ocean and it's an omnivorous species feeding on plankton and algae attached to their coral habitat. Males, like in many other marine species, take care of and defend newborn A. troschelii after they have been hatched by eggs from the female. Note: there is no FPs of the genus Abudefduf (that contain 20 species) in the project. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:50, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support I really appreciate the beautiful color contrast. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:05, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent. And beautifully categorised :-) Cmao20 (talk) 00:24, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support very nice. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:51, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:02, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:40, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice fish, good colors and crop, perfect file name (as always), good documentation and categories. Well done! --Cart (talk) 15:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 16:45, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 19:05, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 21:00:20 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Canada
Info Detail of the Gracanica Serbian Orthodox Church, Windsor, Ontario, showcasing a combination of shapes that I think is quite pleasing (the church itself is gorgeous... just wish a wider angle were possible). All by Crisco 1492 -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- — Chris Woodrich (talk) 21:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good for me Cmao20 (talk) 00:28, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support the round window being slightly off center annoys me, but that's not an issue with the photograph. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:52, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:39, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 19:04, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 14:25:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Primates#Family : Cebidae (Capuchins and Squirrel Monkeys)
Info A Near-Threatened species. No FPs of this Genus. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent photo. Thank you for adding the more specific location category - but please do try to remember to add the date category in future (in this case, Ecuador photographs taken on 2025-04-19). Cmao20 (talk) 14:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, but is the date category a rule of FPC? Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- It's not an absolute rule but it's just generally good practice. See here under the 'Categorization tips' section. I haven't always done it in my past nominations either but we are trying to tighten this up and make sure as many FPs as possible have this done. Cmao20 (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- (Edit conflict) It is not written in as an item in the FPC rules, but a date category is of great help for people who are interested in images for chronological reasons. Commons normal search system is tricky to use if only the camera's time stamp is on the photo. It is much easier to find a photo from a specific date if it's in a date category. Please compare just typing, for example, "September 2015 Ecuador" in the normal search box, as opposed to writing "Category:September 2015 in Ecuador" or "Category:September 2015 Ecuador photographs". There are people on Commons who specialize in sorting photos into these date categories. I'm sure they will appreciate whatever help they can get from photographers who add these cats to their photos themselves. --Cart (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Date categories are sometimes added to my photos, irrespective of whether they are FP, QI, VI or none of these. I do not think this should be a mandatory requirment for FPC. If, after a proposal and vote, the rules are changed, I will of course comply. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- The base for FPCs is the same as for any file on Commons, FPC is just an additional step up. Since date categories are recommended for all photos on Commons per the link Cmao20 provided above, that does include FPCs too. I hope you don't mind if other users add such categories to your photos during nominations; they are really useful. --Cart (talk) 16:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- I am very happy for other users to add date or any other (accurate) categories they fancy. The link, if you read it carefully, does not actually recommend date categories for all photos on Commons, which is presumably why you've not used them in all your June FPCs... Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Under 'categorization tips' - 'The categories you choose for your uploads should answer as many as possible of the following questions... when?: when did the depicted events happen, or when was the image created? When was the image taken?'. So, not a rule but certainly a recommendation. I'm looking at Cart's June FPs and she has used them on five out of seven, missing 1, 2. I'll add them to those ones. Cmao20 (talk) 17:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- True, mea culpa, I'm just as bad as everyone else until I was made aware of this by another user. There are always old things to upgrade here as Commons evolves. But it's never too late to shape up and do the right thing. I was just done fixing the backlog for 'Captions' for all my photos, and now I'm on fixing 'Structured data', so might as well do the date categories too. --Cart (talk) 17:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I think what we all need to do is to leave behind recent recriminations and conflicts over this issue and just try to get categories right going forward, using the 'who', 'what', 'when', 'where' questions the best we can. I've definitely not been good at this in the past. Cmao20 (talk) 17:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- It took me a little over four months to add 'Caption' and 'Location' to all my more than 10,000 photos. ;) --Cart (talk) 17:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, I think what we all need to do is to leave behind recent recriminations and conflicts over this issue and just try to get categories right going forward, using the 'who', 'what', 'when', 'where' questions the best we can. I've definitely not been good at this in the past. Cmao20 (talk) 17:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Date categories are sometimes added to my photos, irrespective of whether they are FP, QI, VI or none of these. I do not think this should be a mandatory requirment for FPC. If, after a proposal and vote, the rules are changed, I will of course comply. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support A photo that makes you look twice, and the second time you smile. Thanks for adding good categories and description, much appreciated. --Cart (talk) 15:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Stunning! --Osmo Lundell hey 17:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Don't loose your patience (like I did), Charles, I feel that overnight tips, recomendations and best practices become a reason for some uers to even oppose for FP although there is no policy for that. Poco a poco (talk) 21:13, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:20, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 12:37, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 13:07, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:36, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 09:42:47 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus_:_Gyps
Info created and uploaded by Mildeep – nominated by Nirmal Dulal -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 09:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 09:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 10:57, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 11:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Wow! --Yann (talk) 13:39, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:44, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support like the wii sports guy said, nice shot! --Osmo Lundell hey 17:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Riad Salih (talk) 21:04, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 21:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Huge Wow! -- Radomianin (talk) 22:07, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:53, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 19:03, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 17:47:51 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Trochilidae (Hummingbirds)
Info Fawn-breasted Brilliant (Heliodoxa rubinoides) in Ecuador. Сreated by Andy Morffew – uploaded/nominated by me Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Advice on fixing the documentation |
---|
|
Support A tad over-sharpened, but the bird and the compo are great. I love the moss on the branch, it complements the colors of the bird so well. --Cart (talk) 19:43, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Honestly the oversharpening is to mask the fact that the beak is slightly outside the depth of field. Always tempting to oversharpen a little in such a circumstance but if Andy Morffew were a Commons author I'd probably suggest he toned it down a little on this picture. Unfortunately he is only active on Flickr. But the image is still at FP level for me. Cmao20 (talk) 00:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Osmo Lundell hey 21:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:33, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 17:47:34 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Trochilidae (Hummingbirds)
Info Sword-billed Hummingbird (Ensifera ensifera) in Ecuador. Сreated by Andy Morffew – uploaded/nominated by me Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment I've upgraded the file name according to Commons file names. In the future, please make sure such the file name is really good before making the nom. Now it's up to you (preferably) to fix the Image description and Categories to get them up to FP standard. Thank you. --Cart (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- All done, thanks to Cart and Cmao20 Юрий Д.К 19:39, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 02:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support The shot of the bird is excellent, but we miss the flower. ;-) --Harlock81 (talk) 08:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- It would not be at a live flower! It's another high quality 'studio' shot... Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:23, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- E.IMANCOMMONS 05:31, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 15:40:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
Info No FPs of this interesting medieval church. Huge resolution (103 megapixels) and excellent quality (observe how the lettering on the side benches is fully legible). created by DXR – uploaded by DXR – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good! Юрий Д.К 19:42, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment The image itself is technically very impressive! Maybe it could be cropped a bit? To me there is maybe too much going on at once – in a way the image feels a bit cluttered, especially in the lower section. Won't you agree? --Osmo Lundell hey 21:09, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- There are more focussed crops (1, 2) but I honestly selected this one because I liked how much there is going on in the frame, I enjoyed this wide, expansive view of the church. Let's see how votes go. Cmao20 (talk) 22:42, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- I would happily support the the second one! --Osmo Lundell hey 23:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- I was originally going to nominate that one (you can see I've formatted the description and categories ready for an FP nomination) but I didn't like the fact that the clock face leaning against the wall at the right was cropped. I'll admit that this one does have its drawbacks per Acroterion but I find it more satisfying overall. Cmao20 (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- There are more focussed crops (1, 2) but I honestly selected this one because I liked how much there is going on in the frame, I enjoyed this wide, expansive view of the church. Let's see how votes go. Cmao20 (talk) 22:42, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment The inherent distortion gives me pause, most evident in the upper level arches, which are stretched to twice their size and made elliptical by the view. The image illustrates a photographic effect rather than a depiction of the church interior Acroterion (talk) 02:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 02:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:17, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:13, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 15:40:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Isère
Info Scenic and well composed French panorama. No FPs of the Lac de Grand Maison and its surroundings. created by MirandaAdramin – uploaded by MirandaAdramin – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice! --Osmo Lundell hey 21:14, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 21:17, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cart (talk) 09:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Weak
Support because I feel that among this bunch of photos this one is the best. Still a great picture (and place). --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:05, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Honestly I don't like that one anything like as much. I think the path adds a visual counterpoint in this one, and elevates the whole scene from what could otherwise be a little bland. Cmao20 (talk) 16:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- I understand. It is just a personal preference: that image brings the focus to the lake, but this one is more about the wider landscape. Both nice in their own different ways. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:56, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
- Honestly I don't like that one anything like as much. I think the path adds a visual counterpoint in this one, and elevates the whole scene from what could otherwise be a little bland. Cmao20 (talk) 16:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 22:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:13, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- E.IMANCOMMONS 05:35, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 14:50:59 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Sweden
Info created by Cart – uploaded by Cart – nominated by ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment - Beautiful panorama of the fog at blue hour over the towers at Preemraff oil refinery in Lahälla, Lysekil Municipality, Sweden. - ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
weaksupport It's very pretty and I love the panoramic format which gives us a whole wide expanse of lovely reflections. But the left of this panorama is visibly less sharp than the right. Overall scrapes over the bar because of subject and pleasant lighting conditions. Cmao20 (talk) 15:43, 18 June 2025 (UTC)Comment: The fog was rolling in from the left, so denser fog conditions on left than on right. ERcheck (talk) 15:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- I know, but that doesn't justify what seems more like slight motion blur than merely softness. Cmao20 (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- You can read the discussion preceding this nom. --Cart (talk) 16:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link, I didn't know about this phenomenon. My vote remains 'weak support' though. Cmao20 (talk) 16:18, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Very understandable. --Cart (talk) 16:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Full support after changes. Cmao20 (talk) 16:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the link, I didn't know about this phenomenon. My vote remains 'weak support' though. Cmao20 (talk) 16:18, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- I know, but that doesn't justify what seems more like slight motion blur than merely softness. Cmao20 (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Having seen similar effects of emerging fog in my photos, I understand that the little softness was unavoidable, and the atmosphere and the impressive overall effect are much more important to me. – Aristeas (talk) 18:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Åh, så vackert! --Osmo Lundell hey 21:10, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support I was about to kvetch about the 'motion blur' before I learned it was refraction. No motion blur, no objections. JayCubby (talk) 21:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
--Ermell (talk) 22:08, 18 June 2025 (UTC)Oppose Nice scene, but unfortunately the left frame is not of the same quality as the right one.
Oppose Per Ermell, this is very obvious, cannot understand the preceding supporting votes Poco a poco (talk) 08:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
the left side is not just unsharp, but actually blurry (as pointed by Cart herself in the pre-nom discussion). But the rest of the image is quite sharp. And this is a large pano, so perhaps a crop and conversion to landscape? --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)Neutral
- Crops are always possible, but I don't think that would make for a photo with the same visual impact. Having just that part is rather boring. --Cart (talk) 12:16, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment New version uploaded. Even though I like this pano very much, I never expected it to get this much attention, so I've never gone back and made the most of it. I found one frame taken 10 min before the rest of the photos, because I liked the little break in the fog that let through some light. It's much sharper because of that fog-break, but it never occurred to me to use it. This time I also have a better version of Lightroom, so overall I could fix the pano better than before. Anyway, see what you think. 'Pinging' previous voters: ERcheck, Cmao20, Aristeas, Osmo Lundell, JayCubby, Ermell, Poco a poco and UnpetitproleX. You might want to F5 it. --Cart (talk) 15:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, perfect now! whole-hearted
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 16:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- This one is great! Still have my Support vote. - ERcheck (talk) 16:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you very much for the improvement! – Aristeas (talk) 19:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, perfect now! whole-hearted
Support Юрий Д.К 19:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support That´s it.--Ermell (talk) 21:15, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Great panorama! Thank you for the improvement. -- Radomianin (talk) 03:28, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:11, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:33, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 11:56:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info created, uploaded and nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support I added categories for the date, the trees, and the weather conditions. Cmao20 (talk) 13:48, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, @Cmao20: for that! UnpetitproleX (Talk) 07:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Very beautiful. Thank you Cmao20 for fixing this. --Cart (talk) 14:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К 21:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 02:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Square crops for far view landscapes doesn't usually work, I struggle here with the compo and the level of detail is not the best, either, sorry. Not a FP to me. Poco a poco (talk) 08:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
- Except the crop is not square at all. It is a 4:3 crop. I can try 3:2 and take off some of the sky and the bottom, but I'm unsure if that is significantly better. In any case, not square to begin with. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 09:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 21:56, 19 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:08, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 20:34, 20 June 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2025 at 15:35:31 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Equidae_(Equids)
Info created and uploaded by Byrdyak – nominated by Kelly zhrm -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:54, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Comment Unconvinced the documentation is at FP level, although the picture certainly is. 'Three zebra' seems a very bare-bones title, and 'unidentified subspecies' in the categories doesn't give me much confidence (and the picture is also categorised with a specific subspecies - which is it? Do we know the subspecies or don't we? Unfortunately this is just the kind of thing the short lived checklist was designed to point out... Cmao20 (talk) 19:08, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
on this basis until some work is done to address these problems. I would not usually oppose for fixable category mistakes but the nomination seems to be picking up lots of support anyway and I don't think it should be promoted in this condition. Cmao20 (talk) 13:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)Oppose
+1. This oppose will slow down the nom enough for the issues to be fixed. I will probably support it once the documentation is up to FP standards. --Cart (talk) 14:39, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, Cmao20 and Cart, for your thoughtful and constructive feedback. The conflicting category has been removed, and structured data has been updated. Given the location (Masai Mara), the characteristic striping, and the absence of other subspecies in the area, Equus quagga boehmi is the most accurate identification.
If helpful, I would suggest renaming the file to: Three plains zebras (Equus quagga boehmi) in Masai Mara National Reserve, Kenya.jpg to better reflect the subject.-- Radomianin (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2025 (UTC) - Addendum: I've now struck the filename suggestion from my comment - many thanks to Cart for already taking care of the rename. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support I will rename after nomination is over. Cmao20 (talk) 16:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- NB: Grant's zebras not Three plains zebras. The ssp. is correct. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, Charles - correction noted and applied. Much appreciated! -- Radomianin (talk) 17:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, Cmao20 and Cart, for your thoughtful and constructive feedback. The conflicting category has been removed, and structured data has been updated. Given the location (Masai Mara), the characteristic striping, and the absence of other subspecies in the area, Equus quagga boehmi is the most accurate identification.
- @Cmao20 Sorry for the delay because I don't have much time due to a lot of work, so the delay is inevitable. Kelly zhrm (talk) 15:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 20:48, 17 June 2025 (UTC)
Support --Osmo Lundell hey 08:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support That's better. And Cmao20, I've already fixed the name. --Cart (talk) 16:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support Clear, well-composed image in natural habitat with excellent lighting. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)
Support per Radomianin. Thanks to all of your for your concerted effort to improve filename, description and categories! – Aristeas (talk) 18:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)