Commons:Closed most valued reviews/2010/10

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Closed most valued reviews/2010/10

Vilnius cathedral

[edit]
   

View opposition
Nominated by:
Albertus teolog (talk) on 2010-09-15 09:11 (UTC)
Scope:
Vilnius Cathedral (exterior)
MVR Scores: 
1. Wilno - katedra.JPG: -1 <--
2. Vilnius cathedral.jpg: 0
3. Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: 0
4. Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: 2
=>
File:Wilno - katedra.JPG: Declined. <--
File:Vilnius cathedral.jpg: Declined.
File:Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: Declined.
File:Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: Promoted.
--Myrabella (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
Ikar.us (talk) on 2010-09-20 22:48 (UTC)
Scope:
Vilnius Cathedral (exterior)
Reason:
best view of the ensemble -- Ikar.us (talk)
MVR Scores: 
1. Wilno - katedra.JPG: -1 
2. Vilnius cathedral.jpg: 0 <--
3. Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: 0
4. Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: 2
=>
File:Wilno - katedra.JPG: Declined.
File:Vilnius cathedral.jpg: Declined. <--
File:Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: Declined.
File:Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: Promoted.
--Myrabella (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
Ikar.us (talk) on 2010-09-20 23:02 (UTC)
Scope:
Vilnius Cathedral (exterior)
Reason:
Shows better the front façade and the relation of tower and entrance. -- Ikar.us (talk)
MVR Scores: 
1. Wilno - katedra.JPG: -1
2. Vilnius cathedral.jpg: 0
3. Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: 0 <--
4. Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: 2
=>
File:Wilno - katedra.JPG: Declined.
File:Vilnius cathedral.jpg: Declined.
File:Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: Declined. <--
File:Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: Promoted.
--Myrabella (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Albertus teolog (talk) on 2010-09-23 11:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Vilnius Cathedral (exterior)
MVR Scores: 
1. Wilno - katedra.JPG: -1 
2. Vilnius cathedral.jpg: 0
3. Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: 0
4. Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: 2 <--
=>
File:Wilno - katedra.JPG: Declined.
File:Vilnius cathedral.jpg: Declined.
File:Vilnius - Cathedral 01.jpg: Declined.
File:Wilno - katedra 2.JPG: Promoted. <--
--Myrabella (talk) 21:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
   

View opposition
Nominated by:
Albertus teolog (talk) on 2010-09-22 12:36 (UTC)
Scope:
Church of St. Casimir in Vilnius (exterior)
MVR Scores: 
1. Wilno - kosciol sw. Kazimierza.JPG: -1 <--
2. St. Casimir Vilnius.JPG: +1 
=>
File:Wilno - kosciol sw. Kazimierza.JPG: Declined. <--
File:St. Casimir Vilnius.JPG: Promoted.
--Myrabella (talk) 21:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
Ikar.us (talk) on 2010-09-22 23:19 (UTC)
Scope:
Church of St. Casimir in Vilnius (exterior)
Reason:
Façade and crown. -- Ikar.us (talk)
MVR Scores: 
1. Wilno - kosciol sw. Kazimierza.JPG: -1 
2. St. Casimir Vilnius.JPG: +1 <--
=>
File:Wilno - kosciol sw. Kazimierza.JPG: Declined.
File:St. Casimir Vilnius.JPG: Promoted. <--
--Myrabella (talk) 21:42, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

St. Poelten Townhall

[edit]
   

View opposition
Nominated by:
AleXXw talk!•me@de.wp on 2010-09-18 17:39 (UTC)
Scope:
St. Pölten Town hall (St. Pöltner Rathaus)
MVR Scores: 
1. Rathaus St. Pölten.jpg: -1 <--
2. St. Poelten Rathaus 2.jpg: +2
=>
File:Rathaus St. Pölten.jpg: Declined. <--
File:St. Poelten Rathaus 2.jpg: Promoted.
--Myrabella (talk) 21:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
MrPanyGoff (talk) on 2010-09-23 10:08 (UTC)
Scope:
St. Pölten Town hall (St. Pöltner Rathaus)
Reason:
I think this one presents the building better. It is well composed, brighter and there are few people that are not distracting here. -- MrPanyGoff (talk)
MVR Scores: 
1. Rathaus St. Pölten.jpg: -1 
2. St. Poelten Rathaus 2.jpg: +2 <--
=>
File:Rathaus St. Pölten.jpg: Declined.
File:St. Poelten Rathaus 2.jpg: Promoted. <--
--Myrabella (talk) 21:48, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Aleuria aurantia (Orange Peel Fungus)

[edit]
   

View promotion
Nominated by:
The High Fin Sperm Whale on 2010-10-04 19:24 (UTC)
Scope:
Aleuria aurantia (Orange Peel Fungus)
Reason:
Lycaon suggested that I take one showing the cup shape. Here it is. -- The High Fin Sperm Whale
Scores: 
1. Orange peel fungus.JPG: +2
2. Aleuria aurantia (Orange Peel Fungus).JPG: -1
=>
File:Orange peel fungus.JPG: Promoted.
File:Aleuria aurantia (Orange Peel Fungus).JPG: Declined
--George Chernilevsky talk 07:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
The High Fin Sperm Whale on 2010-10-04 00:51 (UTC)
Scope:
Aleuria aurantia (Orange Peel Fungus)
  •  Oppose I have to oppose on criterion 3 here. IMO this is not the best view for this kind of fungus. A top view does not nicely reveal the 3D cup shape. If this specimen is still there, I'd suggest a re-shoot but not from straight above. Lycaon (talk) 04:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Scores: 
1. Orange peel fungus.JPG: +2
2. Aleuria aurantia (Orange Peel Fungus).JPG: -1
=>
File:Orange peel fungus.JPG: Promoted.
File:Aleuria aurantia (Orange Peel Fungus).JPG: Declined
--George Chernilevsky talk 07:26, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)


Trakai Island Castle

[edit]
   

View opposition
Nominated by:
Albertus teolog (talk) on 2010-09-24 14:30 (UTC)
Scope:
Trakai Island Castle
  • I'm terribly sorry - I like all your images - but they're often popular locations, thus many contestants are available. Here, is a very similar view, but with transparent trees, and a slightly different perpective, which shows the left side better, not hiding anything else. --Ikar.us (talk) 16:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
MVR Scores: 
1. Troki - zamek.JPG: 0 <--
2. Trakaifront.JPG: +1 
3. Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0
4. Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0
=>
File:Troki - zamek.JPG: Declined. <--
File:Trakaifront.JPG: Promoted.
File:Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined.
File:Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined.
--Myrabella (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
MrPanyGoff (talk) on 2010-09-27 11:58 (UTC)
Scope:
Trakai Island Castle

 Support this. --Ikar.us (talk) 13:15, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MVR Scores: 
1. Troki - zamek.JPG: 0
2. Trakaifront.JPG: +1 <--
3. Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0
4. Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0
=>
File:Troki - zamek.JPG: Declined.
File:Trakaifront.JPG: Promoted. <--
File:Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined.
File:Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined.
--Myrabella (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
MrPanyGoff (talk) on 2010-09-27 12:08 (UTC)
Scope:
Trakai Island Castle
MVR Scores: 
1. Troki - zamek.JPG: 0
2. Trakaifront.JPG: +1
3. Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0 <--
4. Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0
=>
File:Troki - zamek.JPG: Declined.
File:Trakaifront.JPG: Promoted. 
File:Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined. <--
File:Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined.
--Myrabella (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
MrPanyGoff (talk) on 2010-09-27 12:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Trakai Island Castle
MVR Scores: 
1. Troki - zamek.JPG: 0
2. Trakaifront.JPG: +1
3. Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0
4. Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: 0 <--
=>
File:Troki - zamek.JPG: Declined.
File:Trakaifront.JPG: Promoted.
File:Traku pilis.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined.
File:Traku pilis1.Zem.2007-11-16.jpg: Declined. <--
--Myrabella (talk) 22:01, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
   

View opposition
Nominated by:
The High Fin Sperm Whale on 2010-09-26 02:55 (UTC)
Scope:
Nikon D5000

 Oppose as not yet eligible for VI status. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it cannot at present become a valued image since it currently fails valued image criterion 5 (should be geocoded, but is not). "All images are expected to be geocoded unless it would not be appropriate to do so". I have not reviewed the nomination against all the criteria, but if you are able to fix this issue and would like me to re-evaluate the image please leave me a message on my talk page. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 18:10, 26 September 2010 (UTC) - Now fixed --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 19:38, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment - File:Nikon_D5000.jpg is a strong competitor IMO, as it ilustrates the scope better, although it is smaller. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 18:13, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scores: 
1. Nikon D5000 body.JPG: +1
2. Nikon D5000.jpg: +3
=>
File:Nikon D5000 body.JPG: Declined.
File:Nikon D5000.jpg: Promoted.
--George Chernilevsky talk 11:46, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View promotion
Nominated by:
The High Fin Sperm Whale on 2010-10-06 01:40 (UTC)
Scope:
Nikon D5000
Reason:
Nobody is sure whether this or my other one is better, so MVR is best. -- The High Fin Sperm Whale

 Support - IMO illustrates the scope better. --Rastaman3000 (talk) - Visit my new user-page! 15:25, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Support I prefer this perspective. Missionary (talk) 20:48, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scores: 
1. Nikon D5000 body.JPG: +1
2. Nikon D5000.jpg: +3
=>
File:Nikon D5000 body.JPG: Declined.
File:Nikon D5000.jpg: Promoted.
--George Chernilevsky talk 11:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Buffalo Treehopper

[edit]
   

View promotion
Nominated by:
Quartl (talk) on 2010-10-07 16:16 (UTC)
Scope:
Stictocephala bisonia (Buffalo Treehopper)
Reason:
Well it's probably a toss-up between one of my pics, but I think this one shows the best detail. -- Quartl (talk)
Scores: 
1. Stictocephala bisonia qtl4.jpg: +2
2. Stictocephala bisonia qtl3.jpg: +1
=>
File:Stictocephala bisonia qtl4.jpg: Promoted.
File:Stictocephala bisonia qtl3.jpg: Declined.
--George Chernilevsky talk 11:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
Quartl (talk) on 2010-10-07 17:23 (UTC)
Scope:
Stictocephala bisonia (Buffalo Treehopper)

 Support --Archaeodontosaurus (talk) 15:20, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scores: 
1. Stictocephala bisonia qtl4.jpg: +2
2. Stictocephala bisonia qtl3.jpg: +1
=>
File:Stictocephala bisonia qtl4.jpg: Promoted.
File:Stictocephala bisonia qtl3.jpg: Declined.
--George Chernilevsky talk 11:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

Skanskaskrapan (Göteborg)

[edit]
   

View opposition
Nominated by:
Ankara (talk) on 2010-10-05 10:52 (UTC)
Scope:
Skanskaskrapan
MVR Scores: 
1. Skanskaskrapan september 2010.jpg: 0 <--
2. Göteborg Utkiken-Turm .jpg: +3 
3. Skanskaskrapan september 2010b.jpg: 0
4. Skanskaskrapan september 2010c.jpg: 0
=>
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010.jpg: Declined. <--
File:Göteborg Utkiken-Turm .jpg: Promoted.
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010b.jpg: Declined.
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010c.jpg: Declined.
--Myrabella (talk) 07:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
Commons:Valued image candidates/Göteborg Utkiken-Turm.jpg

View opposition
Nominated by:
Ankara (talk) on 2010-10-11 06:29 (UTC)
Scope:
Skanskaskrapan

MVR Scores:

1. Skanskaskrapan september 2010.jpg: 0
2. Göteborg Utkiken-Turm .jpg: +3
3. Skanskaskrapan september 2010b.jpg: 0  <--
4. Skanskaskrapan september 2010c.jpg: 0
=>
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010.jpg: Declined.
File:Göteborg Utkiken-Turm .jpg: Promoted.
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010b.jpg: Declined.  <--
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010c.jpg: Declined.
--Myrabella (talk) 07:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
Ankara (talk) on 2010-10-11 06:37 (UTC)
Scope:
Skanskaskrapan

MVR Scores:

1. Skanskaskrapan september 2010.jpg: 0
2. Göteborg Utkiken-Turm .jpg: +3 
3. Skanskaskrapan september 2010b.jpg: 0
4. Skanskaskrapan september 2010c.jpg: 0 <--
=>
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010.jpg: Declined.
File:Göteborg Utkiken-Turm .jpg: Promoted.
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010b.jpg: Declined.
File:Skanskaskrapan september 2010c.jpg: Declined. <--
--Myrabella (talk) 07:32, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)
   

View opposition
Nominated by:
Missionary on 21:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Scope:
Dilma Rousseff
Reason:
This is the current MV picture of Dilma Rousseff. I believe it has been superseded by her official portrait. See also: Previous reviews -- Missionary

 Info -- This is the present VI, being challenged by the other pictures in the MVR. Please add new comments and votes below.

Scores: 
1. Dilma Rousseff official.png: +0
2. Dilma_Rousseff_2010.jpg: +0 (current VI within same scope) <--
3. Dilma Rousseff - foto oficial 2011-01-09.jpg: +2 
=>
File:Dilma Rousseff official.png: Declined.
File:Dilma_Rousseff_2010.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Dilma Rousseff - foto oficial 2011-01-09.jpg: Promoted.
--George Chernilevsky talk 19:52, 26 January 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
Missionary on 2010-10-12 18:04 (UTC)
Scope:
Dilma Rousseff
Reason:
I'm attempting to revive this discussion, as I believe we have a better image of Dilma since this file was given VI status, namely, Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg. In the other picture, she's facing the camera directly, rather than looking upwards, and is smiling. In addition, here she's wearing a wig, instead of her current hairstyle. This one's inferior, in my opinion. See also: Previous reviews -- Missionary

 Info -- This is the present VI, being challenged by the other picture in the MVR. Please add new comments and votes below.

 Oppose - Missionary (talk) 17:45, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the nominator, you cannot vote. --Eusebius (talk) 18:04, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
MVR Scores: 
1. Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: +1
2. Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: -2 (current VI within same scope) <--
3. Dilma (2009).jpg: -2
=>
File:Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: Promoted.
File:Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former. <--
File:Dilma (2009).jpg: Declined.
--Myrabella (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)

View opposition
Nominated by:
MrPanyGoff (talk) on 2010-10-13 16:14 (UTC)
Scope:
Dilma Rousseff
Reason:
Good representative photo. Good quality. It gives the idea of businesslike manners and the political occupation of the subject. Also, I think that here Dilma looks most beautiful ;) --MrPanyGoff (talk) 16:14, 13 October 2010 (UTC) -- MrPanyGoff (talk)[reply]

 Oppose Here she was wearing a wig, during her battle against cancer. The natural hairstyle shown on file Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg is that with which people are most familiar. Thus, this picture is not so good in terms of illustration. Missionary (talk) 23:43, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

MVR Scores: 
1. Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: +1
2. Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: -2 (current VI within same scope)
3. Dilma (2009).jpg: -2  <--
=>
File:Dilma Rousseff 2010.jpg: Promoted.
File:Dilma Rousseff 2009.jpg: Declined and demoted to VI-former.
File:Dilma (2009).jpg: Declined.  <--
--Myrabella (talk) 20:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Voting is closed. Await automatic removal by VICBot2 at 00:18 (UTC)