Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/March 2020

File:Winter cherry blossom - Prunus Subhirtella Autumnalis Rosea.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2020 at 14:45:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Rosaceae
Info created, uploaded and nominated by PROPOLI87 -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 14:45, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good, beautiful colors -- Spurzem (talk) 22:24, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cluttered background and chromatic aberration -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The background is out of focus because obviously the focus is on the flower. I guarantee you that the color is just the right one even from the truth, because I have not retouched the photo in the colors. I have other photos of the same flowers that are exactly those exact colors PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The color of the flower is fine, chromatic aberration has nothing to do with that. It is the description of the very fine purple/blue/red borders around the flower and other things in the image. It is caused by the lens and can be corrected in post-processing programs like Lightroom. Follow the link and read about it. --Cart (talk) 08:34, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
ok, do you have a program to recommend that is simple to use for these changes? Thank you PROPOLI87 (talk) 16:18, 25 February 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 16:18, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think Adobe Lightroom is the best. It is the program used by most photographers here. It also has thousands of video tutorials on YouTube for all the function in it, in both English and Italian --Cart (talk) 16:43, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. PROPOLI87 (talk) 10:05, 26 February 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 10:05, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral for now. This is your best effort yet at FPC but Cart is quite correct about the existence of chromatic aberration. Look at the border of the flower above the tree trunk and you'll see a blue fringe of colour. Correct that obvious issue, and I think I could support this one. The image quality is not perfect in other ways (a bit noisy) but the composition is good. Cmao20 (talk) 11:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK thank you PROPOLI87 (talk) 16:24, 25 February 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 16:24, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Beautiful flower, but really great flower photos that we've been featuring are significantly sharper than this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:20, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The CA can and should be fixed. Then I'll see what I think. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 2 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Asian elephant walking in Tad Lo river at golden hour, Bolaven Plateau, Laos.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2020 at 02:15:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Order : Proboscidea (Elephants)
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:15, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:16, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely pic - and in the wild too! Cmao20 (talk) 11:40, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support female? Charles (talk) 12:34, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Very probably, yes -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:29, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:00, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:13, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Spurzem (talk) 21:14, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:19, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:47, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support By all means -- In Sri Lanka I had much less luck with wild elephants, alas --A.Savin 14:52, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:30, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Honestly, Basile, I think this is the best FP you've nominated here. Daniel Case (talk) 03:54, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My "best" was possibly this one with the number of supports, but of course every vote is subjective. Thanks! -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:48, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Order : Proboscidea (Elephants)

File:Leipzig Refl NGewandhaus.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2020 at 22:47:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created by [[User:--KaiBorgeest (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)]] - uploaded by [[User:--KaiBorgeest (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)]] - nominated by KaiBorgeest -- KaiBorgeest (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- KaiBorgeest (talk) 22:47, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Vertical Gewandhaus windows would underline the contrasts.--Ermell (talk) 23:31, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Perspective distorsions. Please read the guidelines first. You can also try to nominate your picture in QIC when the perspective is fixed. I have nothing against the deformation of the buildings through the window but I find very unpleasant the blue reflections on the glass aesthetically -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:46, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see what you were going for, but I'm not sure it's quite worked, the blue reflections on the glass spoil it a bit. Agree with Basile that it needs a perspective correction, after which it is QI for me. Cmao20 (talk) 11:39, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:16, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 03:52, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 08:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Poplars Range, New Zealand, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2020 at 09:42:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

View towards Mons Sex Millia from Garnet Peak, New Zealand
View towards Garnet Peak from Mons Sex Millia, New Zealand

Category: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)
Info I thought I'd try something new so here we go: this is a set nomination of a couple of panoramas. Each panorama displays the same thing: small mountain range in New Zealand called Poplars Range. The range has 2 prominent peaks: Garnet Peak on the west and Mons Sex Milla on the east. The first panorama shows a view of Mons Sex Millia from Garnet Peak, the second panorama shows it other way around. The images are taken under very similar light conditions on the same day, 2 hours from each other (that's how long it took me to hike from one point to another). Photographed, uploaded and nominated by me. -- Podzemnik (talk) 09:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I quite like both panoramas - I find the light quite pleasant with shadows providing some good depth. -- Podzemnik (talk) 09:42, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really nice! —kallerna (talk) 09:53, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support very obvious FPs. Cmao20 (talk) 11:45, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Bijay chaurasia (talk) 11:51, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charles (talk) 12:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:03, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 16:26, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressing.--Ermell (talk) 20:17, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support well done. --GRDN711 (talk) 03:21, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:57, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 09:41, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive. --Aristeas (talk) 09:54, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 10:23, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:36, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:29, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's one bloody great shot! Among one of my favorites of your pictures, Podzemnik. ― Gerifalte _Del Sabana 05:31, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:43, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:13, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not really sure whether this is a set but ok Poco a poco (talk) 10:43, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:48, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 19:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)

File:Cebras de Burchell (Equus quagga burchellii), vista aérea del delta del Okavango, Botsuana, 2018-08-01, DD 30.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2020 at 19:30:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Order_:_Perissodactyla_(Odd-toed_ungulates)
Info Aerial view from a helicopter of a group of Burchell's zebras (Equus quagga burchellii), Okavango Delta, Botswana. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 19:30, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:30, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but I don't think this sort of top-down group shot is as captivating as some of the other photos in the category. Also, some of the zebras aren't entirely sharp.--Peulle (talk) 21:20, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is it a helicopter shot? --Podzemnik (talk) 05:54, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment that info should be included to the file description (along with geotag). Aerophoto would also explain sharpness problems. And I agree with Peulle, this photo doesn't stand out among other Perissodactyla FP-s. --Ivar (talk) 06:56, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, a helicopter picture, info added Poco a poco (talk) 00:14, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Tomer T (talk) 20:50, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! Very good composition, beautiful colors, good sharpness. I don't understand why such an image should be declined. -- Spurzem (talk) 23:53, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed, seems fine to me. Sharpness is overall pretty good. Cmao20 (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:07, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 15:47, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:09, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think it's a nice picture, nothing against that Poco. But I feel quite sorry for the animals that they have to put up with helicopters above their heads. --Podzemnik (talk) 05:49, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In case you never did Safari, sometimes, cars are literally queueing so that we, tourists, can have a nice close look at the animals. We get as close as 20m I'd say, which is really close. That seem to be now very common and they are used to that. That also doesn't seem to detract them (too much?) from their usual behaviors and I have witnessed big cats in hunting "session". But maybe helicopter is much louder. - Benh (talk) 12:37, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What Benh mentions is true, but rare. I have joined about 10 safaris and have experienced that twice (for a good reason, the result of those are pretty good, see here and here for which btw I used a 600 m tele as we were far). Podzemnik, I agree, these animals did notice us and looked up, okay, that's not good. We assume that we disturbed them, but not that much that they ran away (probably because it was not an extraordinary event for them and kind of are used to it). If you were consistent I'd expect a systematic "strong oppose" of all zoo pictures in FPC which are more common that wildlife. I got used to but I'm tired about the fact that reviewers make no difference between wildlife and zoo pictures in terms of quality but this comment as a reason to decline a wildlife shot is the last thing I had expected. Poco a poco (talk) 15:27, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Poco a poco: I'm trying not to vote for ZOO shots, especially of those from a short distance where a flash was used. I watched whales once from the Canadian shores. I'd be hiking for 2 days to get to the place where the water was deep and close to the shore so I'd have a chance to see them. After I saw them, about 10 noisy boats with tourists holding telezoom cameras arrived, chasing the whales for 10 minutes until they disappeared under the water. Sorry Poco, I don't want to create any controversy here, I just don't agree with taking noisy helicopters so people can take pictures of animals which would be hard to see under normal conditions. It looks like about half of zebras are actually looking at you and even though the rest of them is not, I'm sure they noticed you. We can't say what they were thinking but if I was a zebra, I know what I'd be thinking and if I was annoyed or not. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:16, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Expecting everyone to ambush / setup trigger photo or whatever do not disturb animals in wildlife and share them for free here... sets the bar quite high. And would not help with diversity of photos here. Have you never voted for bugs macro shot (I didn't check)? Sure u never bothered or crushed any of them in your hikes? I'm pretty sure the helicopter didn't really annoy the zebras. And it's quite nice that someone provides wildlife photos here. - Benh (talk) 10:16, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:04, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:38, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. --Fischer.H (talk) 10:45, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:15, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Order_:_Perissodactyla_(Odd-toed_ungulates)

File:Detail van een bladrozet van een Speerdistel (Cirsium vulgare) 06-02-2020. (d.j.b) 03.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Mar 2020 at 16:07:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Carduoideae
Info Detail of a rosette of a biennial Cirsium vulgare in February.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:07, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 16:52, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support, very unusual --A.Savin 23:49, 21 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:45, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:23, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose rosette is not centered. --Ivar (talk) 07:00, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question @Iifar: Do you want to indicate what you think is the correct centering with a note on the photo? Many thanks in advance.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:28, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment imho rosettes center should be in the center of the photo. --Ivar (talk) 16:40, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for your explanation. I thought you meant the horizontal centering. I deliberately placed the vertical point a little higher. Then the leaf veins are more beautiful. Photo File: Detail of a leaf rosette of a Spear Thistle (Cirsium vulgare) 06-02-2020. (d.j.b) 02.jpg do you like better?--Famberhorst (talk) 17:00, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
To tell the truth, I'm sick and tired of hearing about all the things that should be centered, symmetric, or some other unimaginative "standard". A really good photo breaking such conventions can be so much more dynamic. As is the case here with more of the leaves showing. It kind of reminds me of a time-honored way of depicting things eminating from a center. --Cart (talk) 17:50, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Ivar. —kallerna (talk) 08:13, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 16:42, 22 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:35, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 09:43, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:43, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love the water droplets. Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:37, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Carduoideae

File:Traditional Bulgarian Pugacha.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Mar 2020 at 06:28:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food
Info Pogača - type of bread baked in the ashes of the fireplace, and later on in the oven, similar to focaccia, with which it shares the name (via Byzantine Greek: πογάτσα), found in the cuisines of the Carpathian Basin, the Balkans, and Turkey. Created by --Biser Todorov (talk) 06:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC) - uploaded by --Biser Todorov (talk) 06:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC) - nominated by Biso -- Biser Todorov (talk) 06:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Biser Todorov (talk) 06:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral nice colors but cut on bottom and top. Tomer T (talk) 07:07, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Low depth of field, too. I'd really like to support a photo of this motif. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:28, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Tomer and Ikan. The thing up left is also a bit distracting. --Cart (talk) 12:17, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too small dof, no good cut and disturbing background -- Spurzem (talk) 22:33, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lovely motif and good image quality but the cut-off parts at the top and bottom mean that this isn't an FP-level composition. Cmao20 (talk) 11:33, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I would love to get another FP from or related to Bulgaria, my son's birth country, but the other opposes are right. Daniel Case (talk) 15:10, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Golden hour to sunset - 2019-08-27 19-21 - modelled by Marina Daschner.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 05:45:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created & uploaded by User:Tobias ToMar Maier - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I think Tobias does a lot of good, interesting work with models. I particularly like this series, and this is my favorite photo from it. I find the landscape itself a good composition, and I think the way he positions the model in relation to the light is quite creative and striking, so I thought I'd see what you thought of it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Nice and calm atmosphere. --Gnosis (talk) 06:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is really not "good, interesting" and nice, nice is this version and then this.--Editor-1 (talk) 07:48, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - We'll have to agree to disagree on which photos from that series are our favorites. Feel free to nominate one of those if you like, though. They're both good photos, especially the first one, which I'd support without hesitation. You didn't say what you don't like about this one, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm sorry but I think it is not really great compared with mentioned images.--Editor-1 (talk) 08:12, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That's alright. I know it's sometimes hard to give detailed reasons for our taste. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I prefer this one too, since the light is more attractive. Also here the framing is tight at the top and at the bottom -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree. In that one, the strong artificial light in from behind the camera does not match the natural light coming from the opposite direction at all. Nothing against a bit of fill flash (the current candidate could certainly have benefited from that), but his looks almost like a studio shot in front of a printed backdrop to me. --El Grafo (talk) 09:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this is like a studio shot with exterior environment. It could be natural if the light comes from a street lamp or any other source located outside. I even don't know how it was done with the electricity on this beach. Interesting in my view. Anyway, this would be another nom -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Ehm... 4 AA cels in an HSS flash gun last time I checked ;)--Tobias ToMar Maier (talk) 01:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sorry, but as someone used to reading lifestyle/fashion magazines, catalogs for women's wear and such on- and off-line, I find this and the whole series rather dated like some printed media from the 70s. For me, they are fine as QIs to just show the garments, albeit in rather over-sexed poses, but for FP I'd like something a little more stylish. The photos are an awkward mix of styles, like am I looking at an ambient photo of landscape with a woman, the garments, a sexy fold-out, a portrait or what. --Cart (talk) 09:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I wanted to show the 2017s bikini with the lace insert, the pants and all things you can do with it during the golden hour and a little beyond. Including flash fotography with a color gel and a silluet. Only thing missing is how to put the pants on.--Tobias ToMar Maier (talk) 22:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose In addition to what Cart wrote: The lighting on the face looks very nice as long as I look at the face alone. As soon as I view the picture as whole, the face disappears in the shadows, turning the illuminated front of her torso into the main visual anchor point (possibly good for a fashion shot but really not helpful for a portrait). The pose is unflattering; the model is much slimmer than she looks in this image. If "sexy" is the intention here, this one does it much better. --El Grafo (talk) 10:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That one is a little less unusual to me. It really doesn't seem like this one is going to make it, though. I'll likely withdraw soon unless the voting unexpectedly turns around. I knew this could be a stretch, as I really had no idea how everyone might react. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:22, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice mood. The one El Grafo links to is also nice but seems a bit more ordinary. Cmao20 (talk) 11:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose technically seems pretty decent, but there's no wow here for me. the light is nice, but the contrived pose and otherwise kind of bland background don't add up to FP for me. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cart. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination OK, everyone. Thanks a lot for expressing your views. I appreciate your taking the time to discuss this photo and in some cases in detail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment 4 vs 5 after 11hrs? Ok, your chois.--Tobias ToMar Maier (talk) 22:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Navajo Sandstone1.JPG

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 05:16:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Utah
Info: Navajo Sandstone at the Moccasin Mountain Dinosaur Tracksite, Utah, USA. Second nomination; used better denoising and sharpening algorithms. All by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the light isn't very appealing, sorry --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There's (still) a thin but rather visible halo around the rock from sharpening. And while the subject is interesting, the light is a bit bland and the composition doesn't really talk to me. A useful image that is technically OK, but it does not WOW me. --El Grafo (talk) 10:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't mind the light and it's an interesting subject but the technical execution is not at FP with a visible sharpening halo and a background that looks oversharpened and undetailed. Cmao20 (talk) 11:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:The City of St. George's, Grenada - February 2020.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2020 at 07:12:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Grenada
Info Late afternoon view of St. George's, Grenada, with the Catholic Immaculate Conception Cathedral to the left, and Anglican St. George's Parish Church to the right. All by me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks all right, but there's nothing that makes it fantastic, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 07:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. Good QI, very nice, but not fantastic to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination alright --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:51, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:McDougall marsh.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 08:15:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#Ontario
Info: Autumn colours in McDougall township, Ontario, Canada; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:15, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:15, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Background looks very unnatural. What did you do to it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:39, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My bad, uploaded a wrong file; fixed --The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't still look right, maybe too much contrast? it isn't really sharp, not sure whether this is fixable --Poco a poco (talk) 10:13, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Fix gallery, you need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for fixing it Cart, didn't see the memo. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Still very unnatural background. Probably not a featurable composition for me, anyway, but that's some regrettable editing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Imho first version is still the best. Very nice colors, but it's hard to get FP quality with the mobile phone. --Ivar (talk) 12:00, 29 February 2020 (UTC

True, but not impossible :-) --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose, not good enough technically, although I do like the composition. Daniel Case (talk) 02:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

Info: better composition. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:07, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:04, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per my remarks above. I'm sorry, this is really not close to the standards for FPs, IMO. I'm surprised the other image was passed at QIC, actually. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. Daniel Case (talk) 02:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --The Cosmonaut (talk) 05:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nanpu Bridge 1.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 05:53:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#China
Info created, uploaded and nominated by kallerna. —kallerna (talk) 05:53, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light, ideal POV. I actually had to sneak into a residential building to get this POV. —kallerna (talk) 05:53, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I'll Support this. Very interesting but dystopic urban photo, what with the mind-numbing sameness of the buildings on the left and soul-deadening architecture of the great majority of the buildings in the picture, plus the aggressive gray smog. Interesting bridge, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:54, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question: any chance to see a version that hasn't been downsampled more than twice? --The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:27, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I uploaded more megapixels. —kallerna (talk) 23:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Is that full size now? I hope so. If not, upload the full-size file. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:09, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Wilfredor (talk) 16:21, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice shot. But the file is too small for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:41, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Still roughly twice the pixels here. —kallerna (talk)

Question: why such a small file? That is no longer necessary in 2020.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Why that was not a problem on the another nomination? If you mean the compression, no information is lost. No point on uploading huge files just to use more space. The same thing with reasonable downsampling - no information gets lost. —kallerna (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question The Fujifilm X-T30 offers 6240x4160 Pixel, does it? --Milseburg (talk) 11:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm going to judge the picture in its current resolution (5400x3200) and would not demand any bigger version, as it's now obvious for me that this will not add more detail. The quality (sharpness) of the picture I would evaluate as "just OK for QI". The bridge itself might have wow potential, but in this case there's just too much of distracting elements in the picture to make it excellent for me. Sorry --A.Savin 14:23, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A. Savin. While I have fond memories of this bridge from my first trip to China, where you get a good glimpse of the Lujiazui skyline as you're coming in from Pudong airport, this picture is not FP level. Daniel Case (talk) 07:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin.--Peulle (talk) 08:00, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good QI and nicely dystopian photo, but not interesting enough in terms of light or composition for FP to me. Cmao20 (talk) 11:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination. —kallerna (talk) 14:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hoog water in de Friese boezem. 26-02-2020. (d.j.b) 01.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2020 at 16:00:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Floods
Info High water in the Frisian bosom. Due to the heavy rain, the Jonkersloot has stepped out of its bank and the w:Aerial root (pneumatophore) of a bald cypress Taxodium distichum partially submerged.}}
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:00, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quite messy composition, harsh light, uninteresting POV, the subject itself isn't too pleasing. —kallerna (talk) 15:50, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. Daniel Case (talk) 00:24, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I find the light fine. I think the composition would have been helped by having a bit more water at the bottom, to give the part of the root at the near right more space to breathe. Or maybe moving the camera to the left and shooting from that angle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

Comment Different crop and longer exposure time.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:08, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I like the other one better. The blue water with white ripples is much nicer than the dreary water in this one. Sorry. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:41, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 13:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ayuntamiento Principal, Gdansk, Polonia, 2013-05-20, DD 03.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2020 at 12:58:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Poland
Info The main town hall in Gdańsk, Poland. Constructed between 1346 and 1556, it is one of the best-preserved Gothic-Renaissance buildings in the city, and was painstakingly reconstructed after suffering damage in World War II. created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 12:58, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice, thank you Cmao20 for the nom! Poco a poco (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Pretty view, but not much more than that to me, and at this point, I think that a tower should be pinpoint sharp, or at least sharper than this at this size in an FP unless there's something else outstanding that compensates for that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just a QI for me -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Ikan; there's also a lot of weirdness in the sky around the top of the tower. Daniel Case (talk) 00:24, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support If I click in to view the image, the "weirdness in the sky" disappears. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 20:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. The sky looks fine to me at full size. I would concede that the top of the tower is slightly unsharp, but it's pretty usual for the top to be a bit less sharp than the rest. Overall I'm still convinced this is a good, high-resolution, well-composed shot. Cmao20 (talk) 20:43, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Please note that I didn't say this photo was not good. It is indeed good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:15, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: the left side needs perspective correction. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:33, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Sorry Poco but I don't think this one is going anywhere. The criticisms about the top of the tower are valid, I guess, although the beauty of the building outweighs that for me. Cmao20 (talk) 11:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 11:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pier at Lindos. Rhodes, Greece.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Mar 2020 at 10:39:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Greece
Info created by Ввласенко - uploaded by Ввласенко - nominated by Ввласенко -- Ввласенко (talk) 10:39, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty view but I don't find it outstanding enough for FP. I'd like to see a wider panorama from this spot, this feels almost like a crop from a wider view. The sky is also a bit featureless. Good image quality though. Cmao20 (talk) 16:34, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment So different are the tastes. I don't like these wide panoramas at all, which are usually far from reality. -- Spurzem (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Spurzem (talk) 19:14, 23 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I think I'd like to see a little more to the right, but in any case, there are dust spots that should be removed, including at least one in the sky toward the left a bit above center that can be seen at full-page size without enlarging further. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:50, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done -- I tried to remove everything that aroused suspicion, and I hope the stain too. You again impressed me with your sharp-sightedness. Thank you! -- Ввласенко (talk) 09:48, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think you got them all. I still want more on the right side, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:19, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Trusting your vigilance, I cleared the image once again (but I did not see spots). -- Ввласенко (talk) 08:44, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - No, that's not what I meant. I'm opposing the photo because I don't like the crop on the right side that cuts off the parasols and the island or cape in the background. Beautiful scene, good photo, but not great to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:48, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 07:25, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 21:26, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. Good quality image but IMO not enough wow for FP. --GRDN711 (talk) 20:34, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan Poco a poco (talk) 10:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose --Mimihitam (talk) 23:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 14:21, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mt Sefton massif, Aoraki - Mount Cook National Park, New Zealand.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2020 at 02:38:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)
Info All by me. It's Mt Sefton massif, Aoraki - Mount Cook National Park, New Zealand. Not that we already have 5 FPs from that national park: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. -- Podzemnik (talk) 02:38, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I quite like the view. The tourist on the left side makes it look majestic. -- Podzemnik (talk) 02:38, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 16:18, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Really best at full size. Amazing sight, and it's good that there are a couple of people in the photo (or at least one, but two are fine). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I have found four people so far. :-) And I really wish the most visible guy wasn't taking a photo! Having him just admiring the view would have been nice. We are flooded with photos of people taking photos these days, having someone not doing it would be wow-y indeed. --Cart (talk) 10:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Cart Funny fact: the most visible "guy" who's taking a photo is actually my sister. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:04, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! Well, like me, she'll have to get used to being "one of the guys". :-) You'll have to give her better directions next time. --Cart (talk) 09:11, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:09, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, but those two people don't add anything to the photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:58, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - One does because a person shows scale, and while it would be better if he were just looking and not photographing, the fact that he's looking across the expanse adds something, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:14, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Michielverbeek Actually if the person on the left wasn't there, I don't think I'd nominate it. I don't usually like people in the landscape photos but this time it really adds a good scale to me. I realize how huge the rock mass is. But thanks for the vote anyway, it's always interesting to see how we differ in our reasons, even though we both voted the same way. Regards, --Podzemnik (talk) 09:04, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:48, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 19:22, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:06, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! Cmao20 (talk) 10:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)

File:淡水鄞山寺.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Mar 2020 at 07:21:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Taiwan
Info created & uploaded by Tonyqk777 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:21, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I like this photo very much; thanks for finding it! The lack of geocoding is unfortunate, but the location is described quite specifically enough for others to find it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:31, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful place but I think it's a bit too dark at the sides. Indeed, the image as a whole doesn't seem to have many bright areas, as if the highlights have been pulled back too much. It doesn't look quite natural to me. Cmao20 (talk) 11:44, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A short (English) description would be nice. From the category I learn that this is inside of the Yinshan Temple, but there is no English (or French or Spanish or …) article about that temple. --Aristeas (talk) 15:09, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Aristeas: added English description. Tomer T (talk) 15:18, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - @Tomer T: Thank you! --Aristeas (talk) 15:29, 25 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I wish it wasn't so distorted near the edges, but it's still striking enough and otherwise well done. Daniel Case (talk) 06:09, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It looks a bit underexposed on the sides but the composition is striking.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit tilted to the left, but easy to correct --Llez (talk) 08:17, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: would support if tilt is corrected --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:37, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Really a shame it's so dark. I really like this place and would definitely support if the post-processing was different. Now I'm closer to oppose unfortunately, since the sides and the bottom are almost indistinguishable. Overall underexposed -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:08, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Still very beautiful, but I wish that the exposure was improved. --Aristeas (talk) 08:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. ///Eatcha (talk · contribs) 10:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Taiwan

File:Kirchspiel, Rödder, Mäusescheune -- 2014 -- 2930-4.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 08:28:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info created & uploaded by XRay - nominated by Junior Jumper -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 08:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 08:28, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --The Cosmonaut (talk) 08:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ - Good find. Very pleasant. No reason to expect pinpoint sharpness in the mist, so I hope no-one opposes on that basis. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Very good picture of which there are already two versions of the same time and point of view as FP. Isn't it a bit monotonous.--Ermell (talk) 09:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Fix gallery, you need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Agree with Ermell, to similar to this FP Poco a poco (talk) 10:09, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Sorry, oppose per Ermell and particularly Poco. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:16, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell and Poco. Having the right gallery and section in the nom so that voters can check with previous FPs, is another reason for doing that part of the nom creation right. --Cart (talk) 10:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:40, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 02:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great on its own terms but too similar to the other FP. Cmao20 (talk) 11:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thank you for nominating and reviewing! --XRay ^talk 16:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fire dartfish (Nemateleotris magnifica) (43372442502).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 11:47:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Gobiidae_(Gobies)
Info created by Rickard Zerpe - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Ivar (talk) 11:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 11:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Beautiful image. Lots of detail.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 12:05, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 13:33, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support thanks to Ivar for the nomination, and thanks to Rickard who publish wonderful wildlife photos under free licenses and in high resolutions. That's remind me that I have to check if he added photos since my last import. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 13:33, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 15:51, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:58, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing quality for a underwater picture --Wilfredor (talk) 19:48, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:07, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:26, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:50, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 19:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 06:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent! Cmao20 (talk) 11:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:25, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Fish#Family_:_Gobiidae_(Gobies)

File:Kashgari Musicians.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 11:44:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1910-1920
Info created by Monopoly31121993(2) - uploaded by Monopoly31121993(2) - nominated by Monopoly31121993 -- Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 11:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 11:44, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Fix gallery, you need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 11:50, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Cart, Thanks for fixing this. This is my first time nominating a picture.Monopoly31121993(2) (talk) 12:02, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. :-) The feature is quite new and that is a standard message for getting the info out since many users don't read talk pages or edit summaries. --Cart (talk) 12:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Blurry and strong tilt. Our FPs of this period usually are of much better quality -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting subject, but photographically it's a 100 years old snapshot. It's back focused, heavily tilted, the head of the instrument is missing and the provided description ("Kashgari Musicians" is all there is) is sub-par as well. --El Grafo (talk) 11:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 06:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Peulle (talk) 07:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fruchtwanze Carpocoris fuscispinus-20190718-RM-080107.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 23:10:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Pentatomidae (Pentatomids)
Info Carpocoris fuscispinus on the seed capsule of a poppy flower. Focus stack from 16 frames. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 23:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 23:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - WOW!!! That's an extraordinary insect picture! How were you able to get 16 frames of the bug? Was it asleep? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:57, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Info These bugs sit on one spot forever, this one I think for at least a week. The main problem with these pictures is the wind and the wobbly plant. Thanks for your vote.--Ermell (talk) 06:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:43, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment too noisy this one at the moment and it does have an over-processed look. And I would rotate anti-clockwise to have plant vertical. Charles (talk) 10:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done Thank you for the review and the advice Charles, I hope it is better now. Unfortunately, I disagree with you about the position of the stem.--Ermell (talk) 20:03, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 10:53, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 19:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:50, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:28, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:46, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Extraordinary work again. Cmao20 (talk) 11:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:23, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:08, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. //Eatcha (talk · contribs) 05:42, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Pentatomidae (Pentatomids)

File:Amolops panhai, Panha's torrent frog - Kui Buri Natioal Park (40612198013).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2020 at 06:53:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Family_:_Ranidae_(True_Frogs)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by B2Belgium - nominated by Ivar (talk) 06:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question What at first seems brilliant appears disturbing on closer inspection. Is the frog sitting completely in the water or from what is the flash reflected?--Ermell (talk) 08:11, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ermell: I don't understand your question. The frog is sitting on the creek rock and the water flows over him. Rock is covered with old leafs and vegetation --Ivar (talk) 08:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ermell: @Iifar: @Famberhorst: Sorry, having getting so much alerts from Wikipedia that I muted most alerts. So, this photo was taken in a creek during the rainy season where there was a strong stream, kind of river alike strong stream. This frog jumped into the water and landed on a rock near the nearest bank. The water was flowing powerfully over the rock and I was surprised how the frog had a good grip on the rock despite most it's body was under the water. The ID is 100% sure, I always confirm my IDs with nr #1 person in Thailand to ask. It is more of an artistic shot, at the same time a habitat shot. These frogs are active in the water along the streams, in rocky habitats. --Rushen (talk) 09:21, 06 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That answered my question. I guess it was a little awkwardly phrased. I just wanted to know if he was underwater.--Ermell (talk) 09:15, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Fischer.H (talk) 10:16, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --PROPOLI87 (talk) 12:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 13:12, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Holy ship!, very sharp and hight EV --Wilfredor (talk) 22:54, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:28, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 10:06, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Image is tilted too much. Distracting flash reflections on body. Charles (talk) 10:11, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: I see no tilt and according to metadata, flash did not fire. --Ivar (talk) 10:40, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right, the reflections must be from artifical light sources, but the effect is the same. Very difficult to avoid with a wet subject. But I'm sure it's tilted. Charles (talk) 10:46, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:01, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:22, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Too many blurry parts on the frog for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 13:55, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support without white patches of reflection it would be hard to tell the frog is somewhat underwater, so I think I like these reflection spots. --Helixitta (t.) 17:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Eatcha (talk · contribs) 13:47, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians#Family_:_Ranidae_(True_Frogs)

File:Dülmen, Leuste, Bäume im Nebel -- 2020 -- 5042 (bw).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2020 at 08:29:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia
Info created and uploaded and nominated by XRay -- XRay ^talk 08:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thank you for that suggestion to Johann Jaritz. :-) --XRay ^talk 08:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay ^talk 08:29, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's tilted. —kallerna (talk) 09:08, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, no, it isn't tilted. The Münsterland is flat, yes, but not flat like an ocean. --XRay ^talk 09:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 17:34, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 19:18, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:05, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 00:44, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:08, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support you could have been a little more to the left. then the rear trees would have been more in sight. But nice atmosphere for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Spooky. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Podzemnik (talk • contribs) --Cart (talk) 09:55, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 21:19, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 11:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 20:06, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Eatcha (talk · contribs) 13:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#North_Rhine-Westphalia

File:Le Weisshorn et le Bishorn depuis Bella Tola.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2020 at 20:52:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Valais
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Gzzz -- Gzzz ^zz 20:52, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gzzz ^zz 20:52, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I wasn't sure about the composition at first, but viewed at full size it's quite an interesting shot. Cmao20 (talk) 13:03, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support as well ... It doesn't seem like the sort of subject you'd take a vertical of, but I like how the lesser peaks and the shadows seem to make steps to take the eye upward. Daniel Case (talk) 19:30, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - It's a nice snow-and-rockscape, and I like the viewpoint and portrait orientation, but the sky doesn't help, and there are also some dust spots in the sky that you could look for. If you could take a similar photo with some nice clouds in the sky, you could have a winner, at least as far as I'm concerned. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:43, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Canal del Danubio, Viena, Austria, 2020-02-01, DD 03-08 PAN.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 20:10:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
Info Panoramic view (about 130 degrees) of the Danube Canal, Vienna, Austria. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Typical Poco high image quality but a long way from being one of your most interesting pictures IMO. The half boat intruding into the frame on the left is a little disturbing, and the view is overall not especially scenic or interesting. Cmao20 (talk) 22:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. It's just not that interesting.--Peulle (talk) 08:20, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. I can see what you might have been hoping for but ... I don't know, the light just wasn't your friend here, and maybe this isn't the most interesting stretch of the Vienna skyline. Daniel Case (talk) 04:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 11:07, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 11:07, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bakar Batu.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2020 at 23:11:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by Keenan63 - uploaded by Keenan63 - nominated by Mimihitam -- Mimihitam (talk) 23:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mimihitam (talk) 23:11, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Low resolution, harsh shadows. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose +1. --Peulle (talk) 07:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 08:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose low resolution. --Gnosis (talk) 06:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting shot but not tremendously detailed even at the low resolution provided. Cmao20 (talk) 11:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. I like the vivid color but the composition is too crowded. I think it's time for the nominator to consider withdrawing as in several days it has not drawn any support beyond theirs. Daniel Case (talk) 16:36, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:43, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Porto Covo January 2020-11.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 Mar 2020 at 21:44:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Portugal
Info Breaking waves in Winter, with ships waiting to enter the porto of Sines. Taken at Porto Covo, Portugal. Not as dramatic as the previous nomination, I'm afraid. But addressing the formal issues raised. All by Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 21:44, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Previous nomination can be viewed here. --Podzemnik (talk) 21:59, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, good crop at the right --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:13, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Chillout composition and very nice, however, please could you fix the posterization in the sky? thanks master --Wilfredor (talk) 22:53, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Hi Wilfredor! :)) I can't see any posterization in the sky at 100%. There are a couple of dust spots which I will fix soon. Alvesgaspar (talk) 23:14, 26 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Vlw --Wilfredor (talk) 17:54, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 00:56, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:27, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Location category would be fine as well as GPS.Ermell (talk) 08:11, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral crop is good now, but resolution is still quite low. --Ivar (talk) 09:16, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 09:49, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment -- Maybe the horizon should be fixed? --Ввласенко (talk) 10:23, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per my vote on the other nom. Cmao20 (talk) 13:02, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 13:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 21:41, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:50, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, to me this one looks like another ocean wave photo. —kallerna (talk) 15:58, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support "You are only coming through in waves ... A distant ship; smoke on the horizon" Daniel Case (talk) 21:21, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Still small, and though the rest of the photo is great, the boring sky doesn't help, so the entire photo isn't great to me. Think about the Romantic paintings of stormy seas. Aren't the skies usually dramatic, too? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice shot, but missing more sharpness and wow feeling Poco a poco (talk) 10:42, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 08:20, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 3 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:45, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Portugal

File:Two Arecaceae in the fields viewed through a hole in a tree trunk in Laos at sunset.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2020 at 02:21:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Laos
Info Different enough from this one in my view, due to the different framing, different sky, and different light. Created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The atmosphere... -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:04, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:08, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:17, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love it. :) --Peulle (talk) 07:57, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 08:39, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It'll be a nice POTY candidate - kind of an image that wows you right from a thumbnail. --Podzemnik (talk) 08:52, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't think it can compare to the existing FP which I love. Charles (talk) 11:24, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 13:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:51, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMO more atmospheric than the other one. Cmao20 (talk) 11:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support In this x-ray image, we see a tree growing inside of a tree. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Twin siblings: lucky mother :-) — Basile Morin (talk) 15:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:19, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:40, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 17:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 20:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:42, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Laos

File:Anthodioctes calcaratus, m, right, La Cruz, CR 2018-11-16-15.07.42 ZS PMax UDR (46534284854).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2020 at 09:01:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Family : Megachilidae
Info created by USGS Bee Inventory and Monitoring Lab - uploaded by Qbli2mHd - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- shizhao (talk) 09:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 09:09, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Quite impressive to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:31, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 09:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:43, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 11:21, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:25, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 13:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 17:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:06, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:38, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Obviously very impressive. Cmao20 (talk) 11:33, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:39, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:46, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 16:46, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Diptera#Family : Megachilidae

File:Moscow RSL main building asv2019-06 img1.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2020 at 11:35:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Russia
Info "Reading Room No 3" in the main building of the Russian State Library, Moscow ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 11:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 11:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a beautiful place! I like the perspective too, sometimes these images are better when they are shot off-centre rather than symmetrical. Tiny bit distorted in the corners but that shouldn't take away from what's overall a great interior. Cmao20 (talk) 13:04, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dynamic. I love that it's breaking all "rules" here. --Cart (talk) 16:24, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 20:36, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Verticals are well done, but it looks deformed. The photo gives me the feeling I will fall to the right part of the photo. --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:36, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As per Michiel -Bijay chaurasia (talk) 14:19, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice quality, but I fail to be amazed from the photo. —kallerna (talk) 15:53, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support As a viewer you are somewhat misled. And as a result, you keep looking at the photo for longer. Well done.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:25, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart. (As seen in the classic Russian film, Вся президентская рать ). Daniel Case (talk) 21:26, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find the fact that the room seems to extend into the lower right corner disturbing although it is a technically excellent shot.--Ermell (talk) 09:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ermell Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 22:43, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support excellent, but a little perspective correction would do the photo good in my opinion. Je-str (talk) 10:27, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 10:55, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:01, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:07, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers. --Ivar (talk) 07:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The composition works for me. I understand the objections to the slant - I've objected before to more drastic distortions, but partly because the composition is IMO so good and also because it's a gradual slope, I accept this one without real trouble. And it sure is an interesting room to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:13, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice and high quality.--Editor-1 (talk) 06:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart, Famberhorst, and Daniel. --Aristeas (talk) 08:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 17:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 14:09, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#Russia

File:2020-02-05 Thüringer Landtag, Wahl des Ministerpräsidenten 1DX 3077 by Stepro.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2020 at 22:10:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1990-now
Info created and uploaded by Steffen Prößdorf - nominated by Habitator terrae

Really impressive picture of a symbolic moment (for rezeption see e. g. nyt,bbc,nyt now).

Likely this picture does not match the strong criteria of NPOV, but of course it has less symbolism than [1]<->[2].

Habitator terrae 🌍 22:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Habitator terrae 🌍 22:10, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 23:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Well-timed photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose One of both is seen from behind, cluttered background -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:08, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not too wowed by it, sorry. The fact that only one of the two men is visible is an issue. I'd much rather have the side view.--Peulle (talk) 10:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. --Cart (talk) 11:05, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. --Fischer.H (talk) 14:42, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info I think it could be a valued picture, but not a featured picture. I would not nominate it here. The content of the photo could actually have a historical meaning, but in my opinion the photo itself is anything but special. --Stepro (talk) 18:44, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In my view it is still and excelent capture, exactly because of this other perspective. But anyway there is no mayority for it, therefore I withdraw my nomination. Habitator terrae 🌍 20:15, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bergtocht van Vens naar Bettex in Valle d'Aosta (Italië). Bomen langs bergpad in dichte mist 05.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Mar 2020 at 16:05:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena #Fog
Info Mountain hiking Vens at Bettex in Valle d'Aosta (Italy). Trees along mountain path in dense fog.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:05, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support: moody --The Cosmonaut (talk) 06:01, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A bit boring for me. Maybe it would have worked with a more appealing landscape.--Peulle (talk) 07:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Good quality but I kind of agree with Peulle. I have seen better misty photos on Commons - this one is a little bit generic. Cmao20 (talk) 11:34, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:06, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Claypan Dragon - Flickr - jeans Photos.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2020 at 13:29:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Agamidae_(Dragon_Lizards)
Info created by Jean and Fred - uploaded by Red panda bot - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 13:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- shizhao (talk) 13:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed.

-- Basile Morin (talk) 14:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Side Elevation of Hitex Exhibition Center - Trade Fair Office.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 Mar 2020 at 18:35:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India
Info All by IM3847 -- IM3847 (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IM3847 (talk) 18:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No any reason for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 22:30, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose What is interesting about this? --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:32, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the idea a lot! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 22:44, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 27 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't work for me.--Peulle (talk) 11:51, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can see what might have motivated this, but unfortunately it's just too random, compositionally. Daniel Case (talk) 19:18, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I find the idea compelling and the composition strong with the randomly placed windows across the wall. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good idea but I'm not sure I find it interesting enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 10:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the idea is a decent one, but the composition doesn't quite work in the end. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:01, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arctic skua (Stercorarius parasiticus) on an ice floe, Svalbard.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 11:50:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Family : Stercorariidae (Skuas)
Info The author of this image has sadly passed away, but his work continues to impress. This is an older image but remains to me an excellent bird photo - sharp, with a nice pose, and with a good clear background. created by AWeith - uploaded by AWeith - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info The category into which I have placed this image doesn't actually exist yet, as there are no featured photos of birds in this family. Will it need to be created manually if the image becomes FP? Cmao20 (talk) 11:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it will, but having the right gallery in the nom will be a great help to whoever is doing the sorting. Just make sure you don't have the empty spaces underlined (now fixed). It might even be to the nom's advantage to indicate by an empty section, that it's a first and not "just another gull/dove/heron". Such things shouldn't matter but voters are normally pickier on the "yet another ..." photos. Thank you for thinking of this. :-) --Cart (talk) 12:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 14:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Yes, a great photo by the late Herr Weith. There might be a few dust spots to the left of the bird's head and back, but it's hard to be sure what the spots are. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I thought the same myself at first, but I'm reasonably sure they are tiny water droplets. Thanks for your vote. Cmao20 (talk) 17:45, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed, water droplets are likely. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:22, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 01:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:37, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Eatcha (talk) 14:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Family : Stercorariidae (Skuas)

File:La chapelle Notre-Dame-de-la-Garde et les falaises d'Etretat.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 11:47:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Normandy
Info On the cliffs of Étretat, France, near the chapel Notre-Dame-de-la-Garde created. All by me. Milseburg -- Milseburg (talk) 11:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 11:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 11:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Nice composition and good quality but I'd like to see a bit more at the bottom. Cmao20 (talk) 11:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 14:10, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral: blown highlights are disturbing, especially on the foreground cliff. Lovely composition though. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:22, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Striking. It's not clear to me that anything is blown. There may be a bit of slight overexposure in a small area, which even if so is OK with me for the totality of the photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:12, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice althoug IMHO the shadows have been lifted up too much, speciall the top half Poco a poco (talk) 20:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Excellent, IMHO. MartinD (talk) 15:20, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 20:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 17:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 20:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:53, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I wish the sky had been handled better, and it seems like the landscape might not have needed so much sharpening, and there are some areas of the rock in the front where the highlights could have been tamped down a bit. But the composition and Bastille Day mood are enough to overcome them. Daniel Case (talk) 17:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Eatcha (talk) 14:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/France#Normandy

File:Marbach am Neckar - Alexanderkirche - Langhaus - Gewölbe 1.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 06:44:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
Info created & uploaded by User:Aristeas - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I really like this because all the lines create a lively, largely abstract composition that's unusual for a church ceiling. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Photographer in this case did a really good job. --Gnosis (talk) 06:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you, Ikan, for nominating, and all of you for support! --Aristeas (talk) 08:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My pleasure! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:06, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:14, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Typical good quality for Aristeas, and lots to look at in this ceiling. Cmao20 (talk) 11:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:22, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ Very nice, indeed, but the bottom should be crop the same way as in the top to achieve more symmetry and to avoid having those heads cropped. Will support if fixed. Poco a poco (talk) 20:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment This is a good hint! I will try that … --Aristeas (talk) 08:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done I have uploaded a new version, cropped at the bottom according to Poco’s suggestion. I hope all supporters are OK with this change? ( Question And I hope this is OK in the FPC procedure? Or must I do something, e.g. ping all supporters?) --Aristeas (talk) 10:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Looks much better now, thank you. I Support now. Regarding the impact of the change I think that it can be categorized as a minor change for which you don't need to ping everybody. --Poco a poco (talk) 20:59, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This edit is fine with me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, Poco and Ikan! --Aristeas (talk) 08:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:06, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 17:03, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 20:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:31, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:03, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Eatcha (talk) 14:33, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany

File:Turnbuckles on a support for a jetty 3.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 Mar 2020 at 13:03:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools
Info The dull overcast day turned out to be perfect for photographing shiny metal things. If you are looking for perfect symmetry, well, this is a jetty in the boondocks and not the Sistine Chapel so I did the best I could. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 13:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 13:03, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I fail to see why this should be featured content of Commons. Nice quality anyways. —kallerna (talk) 15:56, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support it had been my photo, I would have offered the photo here too.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:16, 28 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special here in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - It's interesting to look at. I'm undecided, but I just want to say, don't withdraw the nomination prematurely, as I'd like time to consider. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:02, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting but not breathtaking, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 10:11, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 20:03, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting pattern. Daniel Case (talk) 01:59, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:52, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I'd support, if there weren't a lot of jpg-artefacts in the water --Llez (talk) 08:23, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Llez, perhaps not so much artifacts as noise. Anyway, I've applied some selective noise reduction to parts of the water, that's what I can do without losing too much information. Thanks. --Cart (talk) 09:16, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very nice composition. --XRay ^talk 08:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco a poco and Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:47, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Ikan with the difference that I've decided. --Podzemnik (talk) 08:56, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice for me. Cmao20 (talk) 10:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry, but I keep trying to figure out if it is horizontally symmetrical, but it is tilted, and that just kills my brain --Helixitta (t.) 16:59, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about your brain, but please read the initial info. This is not a place or photo where you should expect full symmetry. --Cart (talk) 17:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 15:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Two beached fishing vessels, Nørre Vorupør, Denmark, 2015-07-09-5588.jpg (delist)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2020 at 01:48:33

Info The ubscaled version has better details and sharpness (Original nomination)
Delist and replace by File:Two beached fishing vessels, Nørre Vorupør, Denmark, 2015-07-09-5588 upscaled.jpg-- Wilfredor (talk) 01:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question What does the term "upscaling" mean here? How was this achieved? --Peulle (talk) 12:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would like to clarify that this was done with an incredible artificial intelligence "Topaz Gigapixel" technology that has been proven to generate more details from non-existent pixels. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

They don't "generate more details", it's just like they have some better algorithm for extrapolating available pixels than usual, that's all. --A.Savin 22:17, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep In that case, I completely agree with the others.--Peulle (talk) 10:05, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Keep No. Never ever. High resolution is no self-purpose -- it is only desirable if it really adds detail, otherwise it's nothing but playing with software and a waste of disk space. "Topaz Gigapixel" may make images *look* better in comparison to the same upscaling just when Photoshop or anything else was used; but it does not make images better in reality. Detail is something that only the camera+lens can produce, no software in the whole world is able to add it. Regarding the nominated picture, it is easy to proof it, when juxtaposing both images in full size. Please take a look at the left sign. Can you read its fourth row (where the phone numbers are) better in the upscaled version rather than in the non-upscaled one? Obviously no. And that's the point. Higher resolution, but not a tiny better detail. --A.Savin 13:13, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep A.Savin put words to my uneasiness when seeing this nom. There is no merit in doing these bloated images. It's like putting botox into a file. --Cart (talk) 13:25, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep No need, nothing extraordinary can be seen in upscaled image. Upscaling... can be done just with camera. Or if you have software like in "Castle". --Mile (talk) 18:48, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Keep This 'Topaz Gigapixel' software sounds too good to be true. It just doesn't make sense that any software program can generate details that aren't there. If it does do what the manufacturers say, this nomination doesn't go far enough, we might as well process every FP on this site through the software and get free extra resolution. But honestly speaking, I don't believe it. It seems from reading the webpage that what the program is actually doing is guessing what the extra pixels would look like and filling in the gaps using its AI software to figure out what they would be likely to look like; but I don't really see how that differs in any practical way from normal upscaling, it's just that the program is better at it. It's interesting software and I might look into purchasing it, but nothing can add details that aren't there. Cmao20 (talk) 22:19, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the feedback, I honestly think that the larger image is not only large but sharper, but, perhaps, artificial intelligence is not intelligent enough to add real details at the moment. Thank you so much for the comments. --Wilfredor (talk) 22:59, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:White house with stone wall in Holländaröd 2.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2020 at 13:21:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Sweden
Info In this case, I think the hard light goes well with the clean and stark architecture. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 13:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 13:21, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 00:41, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support balanced lines.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:19, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no wow for me. --Ivar (talk) 07:38, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:37, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ivar --Poco a poco (talk) 21:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, it's missing something.--Peulle (talk) 07:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Shapes, lines and colours are interesting and worth featuring. Cmao20 (talk) 11:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:12, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 16:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:20, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMHO the house is a bit boring (this is why I hestiated), but the photo is really convicing and manages to make the house interesting. --Aristeas (talk) 08:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 21:21, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - composition seems kinda random to me. Can't tell the function of the black wall. No wow. Renata3 (talk) 04:14, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the shot from below.PROPOLI87 (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ivar. -- Karelj (talk) 20:14, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:17, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lacks wow. —kallerna (talk) 16:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination It's about that time now. --Cart (talk) 17:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cabo Norte, Noruega, 2019-09-03, DD 16.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 20:16:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Norway
Info View of the globe in the North Cape, Norway. The popular spot is the northernmost point in Europe that can be accessed by car. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 20:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 21:00, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 21:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 21:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely, a real sense of 'standing on the edge of the world.' I would crop out that irritating shadow at the bottom though. Cmao20 (talk) 22:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Cmao20: Done, thanks, Poco a poco (talk) 12:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:13, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:34, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ah, Nordkapp. Lovely. --Peulle (talk) 08:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:41, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MartinD (talk) 15:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:33, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 17:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart. You'd think the vertical format wouldn't work here, but it does. Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:46, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:50, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Eatcha (talk) 12:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Norway

File:Kalophrynus interlineatus, Striped sticky frog - Khao Khitchakut District (33500345788).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 18:24:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Family : Microhylidae (Narrow-mouthed Frogs)
Info created by Rushen - uploaded by Dianakc - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 18:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- shizhao (talk) 18:24, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. This is something you should do yourself as nominator. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 19:34, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very sharp --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Good quality but perhaps not this author's best. The depth of field on the frog is not as good as usual IMO. Cmao20 (talk) 22:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Cmao20. Fortunately the eye is in focus -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:15, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 20:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:29, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:51, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:00, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Eatcha (talk) 12:17, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians#Family : Microhylidae (Narrow-mouthed Frogs)

File:Lörrach - Synagoge.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 14:39:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info created by Taxiarchos228 - uploaded by Taxiarchos228 - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 14:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 14:39, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - To me, this is a fairly bland building in fairly bland light and somewhat noisy. Maybe in resplendent light, it wouldn't come across as a bland building. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:03, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow, a bit noisy and a dull sky --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan - perhaps this subject would look more interesting in better light, but I find this image quite dull as it is. A fine photo and good for use in Wikipedia etc. but not outstanding enough to be FP. Cmao20 (talk) 22:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Also shows the distortion that results from perspective correction. Daniel Case (talk) 00:58, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Eatcha (talk) 12:19, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sea pines disheveled by the wind in Vada - Rosignano Maritime.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 20:25:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Tuscany
Info The sea wind took away the canoe, and bent the stem of the pines in Vada, in the naturalistic beach - Vada Rosignano Maritime.
Created, uploaded, nominated by -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful story, but some parts of the photo are too blurry for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the subject very much, but once again there is a lot of chromatic aberration going on. I think the sky looks a bit too cyan to be quite natural too, the colours need changing a bit. Cmao20 (talk) 22:21, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quite ordinary in my view, and once again, very strong chromatic aberration -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:22, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michiel and Cmao. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because of the technical quality.--Peulle (talk) 08:19, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Without even looking closely, I'm just not excited by this one. Daniel Case (talk) 06:13, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Eatcha (talk) 13:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eopsaltria australis - Mogo Campground.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2020 at 05:07:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Petroicidae (Australasian Robins)
Info created & uploaded by User:JJ Harrison - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - How about another of JJ Harrison's outstanding bird pictures? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:07, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 05:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:43, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support @Ikan Kekek: Keep 'em coming! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:36, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 08:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 08:55, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 09:53, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:02, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:34, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:31, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 20:46, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 21:00, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 12:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 02:01, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:02, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charles (talk) 10:09, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:32, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:25, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 10:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:30, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Petroicidae (Australasian Robins)

File:Recife, the Brazilian capital of social inequality.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 00:14:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Others
Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 00:14, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overprocessed -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basile Morin please could you add more information about what is overprocessed for you? --Wilfredor (talk) 00:23, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well, many things can be at the origin of this artificial aspect and this is more your role I think to find which button you turned excessively here, however in my view there's too much clarity, too much contrast, and this is visible immediately at the thumbnail. Looking at full size just gives a confirmation of this first negative impression -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Since a new version was uploaded 5 hours ago without notification on this page, I just want to warn the reader my comment above is concerning this version, and not the current image. Clearly a tremendous change. Much more natural now, although the light is not great unfortunately. In any case, please let us know which version is valid for this candidature -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:48, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review, sorry for not inform abot the reupload, however I was very tired yesterday, you was right, also I was working over the JPG file and not over the RAW, the result is a image with more details, also i uploaded the source file too. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 12:31, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Fix gallery, you need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment From my point of view, once you switch to b&w, you actually can go a bit overboard with the processing and get an interesting and better result. I remember another nom as a good example of what going "outside the box" can do. This is a lively and interesting photo that could benefit from an editing that accentuates the people in the photo a bit more. Per Martin in the nom I mention, take a look at Sebastião Salgado's photos/editing and see what you think. --Cart (talk) 12:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Cart and Basile Morin I am particularly a fan of Sebastião Salgado, he is very recognized in Brazil. I have tried to take your recommendations highlighting people but without falling into the overprocessed. Obviously the film development is much more real and beautiful, I also have doubts about whether Sebastian was really using edition after taking his photos or simply played with the light that was at the time of taking the picture. BTW, I would like to hear your opinions regarding this new version, thank you very much --Wilfredor (talk) 15:10, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral now -- Basile Morin (talk) 15:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC) vote updated after the reverted version -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC) Cache problem probably, this version is not overprocessed in my opinion. But the light is not excellent -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not such a big difference. Unfortunately, I think you were not so lucky with the light for this scene, and it makes it difficult to make it wow-y. --Cart (talk) 15:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In my opinion, some of Salgado's work is overprocessed as well (David Yarrow is another example btw.) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:57, 29 February 2020 (UTC) (Wilfredor: your first version resembled that style more closely)[reply]

Yes Frank, Salgado's work is overprocessed, no doubt about it, but he has developed it into a style. A style of his own, like many other successful photographers. I don't think that Commons' FPs need to be only in the style of National Geographic. IMO a rather soul-less style. Or as the photographer says in The Bridges of Madison County: ...making sure his pictures are in focus, with “not too much personal comment”. Commons should reflect a number of styles. --Cart (talk) 19:25, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I think we were not so far apart in the first place (see my comment below). I find my own photography soulless. A price that I paid for earning a couple of stars here. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:20, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I beg to differ, you have some very good shots. You are always welcome to join me on the Dark Side of FPC. If you can stand a lot of opposes. ;-D --Cart (talk) 22:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hehe, dark side sounds promising! But seriously, I don't like how this process here locks me in. That's why I stopped nominating my own pictures a while ago. Now, I might warm up to the idea of clean and somewhat boring documentary-style images again. But for now I just enjoy seeing something fresh appear on this page occasionally. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:01, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cart This version was the original nomination, what do you think of this version? --Wilfredor (talk) 15:37, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not too fond of that either. The processing brings out details, but it ends up looking almost like an ink drawing. You need a delicate touch to make this work. --Cart (talk) 15:45, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very good image of high documentary value.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:30, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To me, the question at hand is not so much about the processing, but about the composition. Many good black-and-white images work because the photographer has used the contrast of different subjects in a scene in a smart way. To me, the above image contains too many elements that closely resemble their background, e.g. the people on the right. I also find this image a bit too cluttered (unless that's intended), which makes it too busy for my taste. Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:06, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The chaos of the amount of elements represents in itself the chaos that it sought to represent, which in turn is the chaos in the day, in the minds of these people and observing Frank's comment, I think that at this point I will upload a photo with the contrast that I want to show, I respect the opinions expressed here, however, I think that it has entered a more artistic than technical terrain, so, I will Keep the contrast that I wanted to show in the beginning with all due respect, especially to Basile Morin comment and maybe you might want to change your vote oppose. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 18:12, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I support that approach, Wilfredo. Do what you think is the best. The feedback here on Commons often has the tendency of suppressing any style. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:17, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I think Cart cut to the heart of the problem: It's the light. Otherwise, I like the photo very much. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:13, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It's bit busy indeed … --El Grafo (talk) 10:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The light may not be a problem in and of itself, but when it makes it hard to decide whether the people or the artwork on the walls is the subject of the image, it is. Daniel Case (talk) 07:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good documentary photo. Cmao20 (talk) 10:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support there are things I wish were a bit different (mostly already covered), but the quality and composition are good enough for me, and I'd like to see more of these scenes of people in their lives (beyond models and individual portraits) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support as Rhododendrites. --Aristeas (talk) 20:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support --Wilfredor (talk) 14:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 22:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Others

File:UñacB&W-0086.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2020 at 00:17:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sergio Uñac, governor of San Juan province, Argentina

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info all by me Ezarateesteban 00:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 00:17, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, that is not a good expression, it looks like he is biting his lower lip and the way his jacket is draped around his middle makes him look pot-bellied. Also there is a "flying saucer" attacking him from behind. --Cart (talk) 20:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cart. At the very least the top could have been cropped off a bit. Daniel Case (talk)

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:32, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:ارژنگ سیفی زاده.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 15:35:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
Info created & uploaded by Shimashayesteh - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 15:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 15:35, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition too much tight IMHO. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:47, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support interesting portrait --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a bad portrait but I agree with Wilfredor that the crops are too tight. Cmao20 (talk) 11:21, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support for the direction he is facing, I agree the crops are tight, but the quality is pretty good and it seems like a pretty good portrait of a notable musician, capturing some amount of intensity as he's playing — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The opposers have some points but for me the intent expression on his face and the limning put it into the green. Daniel Case (talk) 18:28, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This is basically a very good head and partial body shot of a musician. Whether you consider that an FP is a matter of taste, but it certainly would look great on the man's website, or reduced on his business card. I might rather see him playing his tar with a straight-on image showing the whole front of the instrument, but that preference really doesn't reduce the quality of this portrait. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:La couronne impériale depuis Bella Tola.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 21:07:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Valais
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Gzzz -- Gzzz ^zz 21:07, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Perhaps a more attractive composition ?
Support -- Gzzz ^zz 21:07, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm not sure about the composition, but the sky seems a little noisy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing light -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:41, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment In my eyes motif and light are very attractive. I also appreciate the notes. But the lower left part looks a bit soft. --Milseburg (talk) 11:32, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality but not up there compositionally for me. It's the sort of photo anyone would take from the top of a mountain. That's not to say it isn't good, it definitely is, but it's not extraordinary. Cmao20 (talk) 11:23, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I like the other one more, but this will do as well. Daniel Case (talk) 04:58, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:38, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Snow Canyon.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 Mar 2020 at 19:38:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United_States#Utah
Info: Navajo Sandstone and basalt lava flow, Snow Canyon State Park, Utah, USA; all by -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:38, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Strong noise in the sky and not wow --Wilfredor (talk) 19:46, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done:denoised --The Cosmonaut (talk) 19:58, 29 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Does the basalt hill come to an end to the left? The left crop feels a bit random to me, though I get the subtle arch you're depicting. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:01, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basalt is the black rock in the foreground, everything else is sandstone of various colours. The rusty red sandstone outcropping as the gently sloping hill does not extend farther to the left. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 03:38, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I actually knew what basalt was. Silly error on my part. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:58, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautiful scenery. Photo seems a bit overworked. But it is also an older photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:06, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 20:59, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Famberhorst. --Aristeas (talk) 08:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A bit overprocessed, like a lot of these old images you have from the American West, but this one is not too bad at full size, and the composition and colours are very good. Cmao20 (talk) 11:22, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as Overprocessed Daniel Case (talk) 18:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 20:18, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:37, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kapu Beach Lighthouse .jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2020 at 15:15:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#India
Info created by KshitizBathwal - uploaded by KshitizBathwal - nominated by Im3847 -- IM3847 (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IM3847 (talk) 15:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 15:23, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This illustrates one of the problems with drone photos, the composition would have been better if the photo orientation was upright but you can't switch orientation as fast as with a normal camera and try several framing options. With the 'upright', the end of the lighthouse cliff would have been in frame and less of the not so interesting beach on the right side. --Cart (talk) 15:30, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Taken from the wrong place. Why are you commenting Cart? Are you happy to see it promoted? Charles (talk) 16:50, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles, it's called a gentle approach, something you don't use very often. This is a nom by an inexperienced FPC participant and a photo by a Commons newbie, no need to scare them away with a sledge hammer oppose right from the start. Sometimes comments and suggestions are enough, it has been done several times on newbie noms. If need be, I can add a real oppose later. --Cart (talk) 17:16, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I understand, and your comments were constructive, but the vote should be honest. Otherwise, others need to step in when we could just ignore. Charles (talk) 18:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Charles, I can be 'honest' without barking my thoughts about a photo like some Gunnery sergeant. I don't think I have added to any other voter's work burden by just commenting. At the moment we are actually free to leave comments on nominations without voting (same as Poco and Basile did on another nom). If you would like to remove that right and make voting mandatory when posting comments on a nomination, please open a discussion about that on the FPC talk page. --Cart (talk) 18:30, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination--IM3847 (talk) 17:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cyclemys oldhamii.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2020 at 08:07:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Testudinidae_(Tortoises)
Info created & uploaded by Rushenb - nominated by Ivar (talk) 08:07, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:07, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:21, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quality is great but it looks too dark to me Poco a poco (talk) 11:28, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

+1. Underexposed in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral The shield is not sharp everywhere. The upper part of the photo is too dark for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco and Famberhorst. But I'm not if even adequate light would redeem the unexceptional composition. Daniel Case (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 18:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Ivar (talk) 19:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:St. Jakob Rothenburg ob der Tauber 20161203 001.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2020 at 19:09:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info created & uploaded by Tilman2007 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:09, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It needs a perspective correction and the left edge is out of focus --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:02, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Definitely an impressive image. But Michiel is right about the perspective and the missing sharpness at the left; in addition, there are irritating CAs. While perspective and CAs could be fixed, I fear that the general lack of sharpness at the left is not fixable (it is not just out of focus: I cannot find anything in focus at the left; maybe a lens defect?). Sorry! --Aristeas (talk) 15:20, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Beautiful place but per Aristeas, there are a few technical faults here. I'd also point to the vignetting in the top corners. Cmao20 (talk) 22:11, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 21:56, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cowboy eating a calf penis raw.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2020 at 08:06:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Colin Brown - uploaded, nominated by Nom d'util -- Nom d'util (talk) 08:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nom d'util (talk) 08:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Watermark and disgusting motif. --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:16, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Misleading file name: 1) when you neuter lifestock, you remove the testicles, not the penis; 2) for whatever reason, he's holding them in his mouth, but nothing in the image (nor in the original description at Flickr) suggests that he's actually about to eat it – it's probably just gonna go into the tin can with all the others after he's done fooling around. --El Grafo (talk) 09:34, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: the watermark is an immediate disqualifier per the Guidelines. Also, the resolution is quite low. --Peulle (talk) 09:24, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Oppose per Palauenc05. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Fischer.H and others, if you leave a vote after a file has been FPX-ed, you will automatically prolong that file's time here on the page since you reset the archiving clock for FPCBot to the last timestamp on the nomination. If you agree with the FPX, just leave it be. (Yes I know, I too prolonged it by an hour by leaving this info. And yes, it can be archived manually at the FPX time.) --Cart (talk) 19:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:AIDAperla in Bridgetown, Barbados - February 2020.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2020 at 07:40:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Ships
Info And for a moment, between two heavy, tropical rainshowers, the late afternoon sun came out... AIDAperla in the port of Bridgetown, Barbados; all by me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:40, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:40, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I really like that ship. The painting on it really helps. Nicely done! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not special enough for me, sorry. It's just a nice QI of a moored ship.--Peulle (talk) 08:18, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:02, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Sorry for not supporting this. With such a brutalism apartment building ship, I'd want something more than a very good passport photo of it. --Cart (talk) 13:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Steel, dear Cart, steel! And resistance's futile anway --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 14:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Steel brutalism? "Do we have an article on that yet?" (#3) --Cart (talk) 14:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I liked this one particularly due to the excellent composition with the impressive buildings at the left. Here I find the framing tight on both sides and at the bottom. Also the houses behind the lips are a bit distracting -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:17, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:20, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:48, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The odd painting on the ship makes this special enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 22:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Quality is just ok, lighting is good, the crop subptimal to me (too little at bottom, too much at top) but what needs an improvement in my eyes is the right crop, can you offer a bit more to let the ship breath? Poco a poco (talk) 11:32, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I’d love to, but there was absolutely no free space to the right (or left) with several ships being anchored in port... —Martin Falbisoner (talk) 11:52, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Peulle. —kallerna (talk) 16:54, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak support Peulle and Cart have a point (I think it could do better with less sky), but I'm impressed enough with the ship to support. Daniel Case (talk) 22:32, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:39, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the clouds are nice, but in total per Peulle.--Christof46 (talk) 19:51, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good by no means outstanding IMHO, esp the uninspired straight perspective does not appeal to me. Background is really distracting. Slightly oversharpened to me but that alone would be a minor flaw. --Kreuz schnabel 20:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Basile, et al. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:15, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:49, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:A wall carving near Zenana Mosque.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2020 at 05:54:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#India
Info All by IM3847 -- IM3847 (talk) 05:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IM3847 (talk) 05:54, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good shot, but for an FP something is missing. The sharpness is not optimal (out-of-camera JPEG I guess), and the overall composition is not that great, sorry. --A.Savin 14:30, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin, especially his remarks on composition. The light isn't great, either. Nice motif, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sharpness isn't perfect at full size but it is 24mpx, downsize to ~10mpx and it looks great. I agree the composition is not outstanding, but it's the kind of photo that doesn't really need an outstanding composition, the point is to display the motif in a good-quality photo. Compare this FP - nothing outstanding in composition, but it would be hard to think how one could produce a better composition of that motif. Same applies here. Cmao20 (talk) 11:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - That's a much better composition, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose no wow for me. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 11:48, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Laurenzikirchweih Sousaphone-20180811-RM-161622.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2020 at 20:36:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
Info Sousaphone player at a church fair. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:36, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 21:44, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:18, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose no clean--shizhao (talk) 09:04, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose imho it has very messy compo, everything and everybody is cropped, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 15:45, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - As a musician, this grieves me, but I have to agree with Ivar. Do you have any photos that show the whole instrument? Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:46, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it depends on what kind of photo you are making. For small instruments you can have all of it in frame. This is a very large instrument and the description is "Sousaphone player" with the focus on the man playing it. With the whole instrument visible the man becomes secondary. You seldom have the whole piano in frame when you take a picture of the pianist. This is very nicely framed with the face of his colleague showing up left for band context and the smiling girl right for event context. --Cart (talk) 08:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Thanks for your support and explanation Cart. @Ikan: I don't have a complete picture. At first sight it might look messy, but still things fit together very well. The concentrated sousaphone player the listening girl, the trumpeter playing along and the reflections of the bumper cars racetrack are dominated by the colour red.--Ermell (talk) 09:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support for the reasons explained by Cart (thank you!). --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Cart that this needs to be considered as a portrait of the player rather than the whole instrument. But I think in its current state, the image is neither here nor there. There is so much going on in the frame that the man still is somewhat secondary. I find the two other persons very distracting, as my eyes are automatically drawn towards them, even though they are out of focus and in the corners. I think for a portrait of the player, a much tighter crop would be necessary in order to carve out a clear subject. I've played around with it a bit, and a tight 5:4 portrait orientation crop starting with is wrist just outside the frame at the lower left corner seems to work pretty well – I'll try to leave an image note for illustration. --El Grafo (talk) 09:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart. Cmao20 (talk) 11:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery section changed since we now have a new section for this per this edit and suggestion on that nom. --Cart (talk) 11:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find this a potentially valuable image, but the composition and lighting doesn't quite work for FP for me. I find myself looking everywhere but at the player. There's the brighter light on the instrument, on the girl's head at his shoulder, etc. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:44, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. Daniel Case (talk) 04:21, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Motorschip Greate Griene 03800980 (d.j.b.) 04.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2020 at 17:45:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools Mounting part of Motorschip Greate Griene.
Info Motor ship Greate Griene 03800980 of state forest management in Friesland. Confirmation of the ship ashore.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 17:45, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Fix gallery, 'Objects' have no countries, you need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 18:23, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support NIce clean mooring photo. --Cart (talk) 18:24, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 00:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:06, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sorry, no wow for me. --Ivar (talk) 07:40, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nor me. --Peulle (talk) 07:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose certainly deserves it QI badge, but for FP I'm missing the special something. --El Grafo (talk) 10:12, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. --Fischer.H (talk) 17:33, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality as usual but I agree that it's not quite special enough. Cmao20 (talk) 11:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support I thought this was one of Cart's, really. It would benefit from its WB being warmed up a bit whatever the outcome of this FPC. Daniel Case (talk) 21:24, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20 -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This is a very good composition and I do think it's good enough to feature, so I'm just registering that support in what's clearly a losing cause. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:13, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:55, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:11, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lacks wow. —kallerna (talk) 16:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:11, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rhodochrosite on Matrix - Peru.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2020 at 16:30:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Ivar (talk) 16:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:30, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 17:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice! Also leaving a note for JJ Harrison: The {{Retouched}} template is not used to describe focus stacking anymore. Use {{Focus stacked image}} instead since that allows for entering the number of frames and software used. The 'retouched' is used for when you alter the image like cloning out lint/dead bugs/whatever, remove a disturbing element in a photo or add say a bit more sky. --Cart (talk) 18:37, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 19:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:47, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:01, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent, would love to see more like this! Cmao20 (talk) 22:10, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 01:12, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:20, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:08, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This image rocks! Daniel Case (talk) 03:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fun fact: any time that I've googled my Wikipedia username, the only results that come up apart from me are when people write "rhododendrite" instead of "rhodochrosite" — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Rocks_and_minerals#Minerals

File:Ahaetulla prasina, Asian vine snake - Kaeng Krachan National Park (33300114094).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2020 at 19:04:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Colubridae_(Colubrids)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by B2Belgium - nominated by Ivar (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A strong wow and the most important part of the lizard is good in focus --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:42, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Certainly a staggering shot, but not near FP quality. Let's hope there was no human intervention. Charles (talk) 20:50, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:16, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 15:33, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Ivar (talk) 15:34, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Snow goose in Central Park (33138).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2020 at 14:14:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Anser
Info all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've gone back and forth on nominating this one. I could conceive of a better background, of course, but the sharpness/detail is quite good (that distinctive sneer, for example, is clearer here than in the headshots we have in the category). — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:14, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 15:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support As I said on your talk page, this is good enough for FP to me. Maybe a tiny bit low on wow but the high image quality makes up for it. Indeed it does seem to be better than the existing shots in the category. Cmao20 (talk) 15:43, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice, but nothing special. Lacks wow. —kallerna (talk) 17:00, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice photo but no wow.--Ermell (talk) 19:04, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as you say, background. Charles (talk) 21:31, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:20, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good quality image, not outstanding -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:23, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination - seems safe to withdraw this — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dinant reflected.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 Mar 2020 at 23:07:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Belgium
Info created by Jiuguang Wang - uploaded by Andrew J.Kurbiko - nominated by Mimihitam -- Mimihitam (talk) 23:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mimihitam (talk) 23:07, 1 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - That's quite a beautiful photo, but both the water and sky are posterized, there's a dust spot above and a bit to the left of the steeple, and I don't like having a blurry flag right at the right margin and would suggest to a user who's here to engage with us that they crop it out. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:36, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ikan Kekek i've cropped the blurry flag, unfortunately I am unable to fix the other problems. Mimihitam (talk) 12:32, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 08:42, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I can get over the blurry flags because the composition has potential but the oversaturation and posterised water spoil it.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:48, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--shizhao (talk) 09:03, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose On the positive side, this one really has nice scenery, beautiful evening light and a great composition. But it is terribly oversaturated, posterized, and the description consisting of only two words is a bit … let's say "meagre" as well. --El Grafo (talk) 10:01, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice idea with the reflection, but the candy colours and the issues mentioned above spoil it, sorry. --Kreuz schnabel 17:58, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 18:47, 2 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per El Grafo, --Cart (talk) 10:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good composition and beautiful photo but the colours look very oversaturated and there is blurring and distortion at the edges. Cmao20 (talk) 11:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral --Andrei (talk) 13:36, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It’s a pity about that candy colours, not to mention the minor issues! This would be such a beautiful image … We should re-do that photo, just in better quality ;–). Who could visit Dinant? --Aristeas (talk) 08:40, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have reverted some of the over-processing and cloned out the flag in this version. It's yours if you want it, just copy it and upload it. :) --Cart (talk) 00:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, although I think Cart's edit could work. Daniel Case (talk) 04:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It would still need to be deposterized and the dust spot would need to be removed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:35, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 8 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 10:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Das Rind, Tafel II.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2020 at 02:29:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Animals
Info created by Hermann Dittrich - uploaded by Nom d'util - nominated by Nom d'util -- Nom d'util (talk) 02:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Nom d'util (talk) 02:29, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Probably a good VI, but nothing outstanding or so unusual to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:49, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. This is a drawing not a photo. --Cart (talk) 09:50, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 17:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:33, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Cart (talk) 12:03, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 10:48, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Porta secondaria sulla facciata della Chiesa di Santa Maria a Montepulciano.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2020 at 08:04:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Doors
Info created by PROPOLI87 - uploaded by PROPOLI87 - nominated by PROPOLI87 -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you PROPOLI87 (talk) 10:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 10:24, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Sorry but I find this neither particularly exciting (lacking wow factor) nor of excellent quality..--Peulle (talk) 12:27, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle--shizhao (talk) 13:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:50, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- Mediocre quality. Sorry, we have hundreds of better pictures of portals. --Palauenc05 (talk) 20:37, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:26, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Time to withdraw per other opposes and no supports in four days. Daniel Case (talk) 03:58, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 14:41, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Bengal tiger (Panthera tigris tigris) female 3.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2020 at 18:00:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
Info A Bengal tiger in the wild in central India. We have nine tiger FPs. All are zoo images and none are the Bengal tiger. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charles (talk) 18:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support very good.--Ermell (talk) 20:02, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:01, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done Charles Cmao20 (talk) 22:23, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:41, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:10, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:27, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:25, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:21, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 10:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:40, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:01, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)

File:Jaguar (Panthera onca palustris) male Three Brothers River 2.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 Mar 2020 at 19:38:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
Info All by Charlesjsharp --> -- Charles (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charles (talk) 19:38, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow.--Ermell (talk) 20:01, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:18, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful jaguar, impressive photo! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 20:59, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Scary with 400mm. --Axel ^(talk) 21:31, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful cat and pose. --Cart (talk) 21:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:08, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support and again, super work. Cmao20 (talk) 22:23, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 01:15, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:26, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. --Aristeas (talk) 09:09, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:27, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:50, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:04, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:21, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:24, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:44, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice pose - Benh (talk) 18:58, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:31, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)

File:Daniela Danz, Fokus Lyrik 2019 02.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 03:07:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Kritzolina - uploaded by Kritzolina - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 03:07, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 03:07, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent portrait. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:17, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:53, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 08:08, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Totally agree with Frank, --Cart (talk) 08:09, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The fine details (especially hair & lips) look quite mushy, possibly due to in-camera noise reduction. But a screen size it looks alright, although I feel the urge to play around with different options for the crop. Otherwise, I agree with previous comments. --El Grafo (talk)
Support Good expression, nice clean background. El Grafo is right but it is still FP level to me. Cmao20 (talk) 11:35, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The lighting is good, but the technical problems are huge. All details are hidden in mushy areas, so to me this is no FP. --Granada (talk) 13:42, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sorry, but imho quality (lack of details) is not up to our FP level. --Ivar (talk) 18:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ivar, the area around the lips is definitely below the bar, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 20:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ivar --Cvmontuy (talk) 20:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others, although still very useful photo. --A.Savin 02:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Notably blurred below the nose. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:37, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technical issues aside, I just do not find this among our best portraits. Daniel Case (talk) 05:39, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:45, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fox Sparrow (Sooty) (31848226997).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2020 at 22:40:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Passeridae (Sparrows)
Info created by Becky Matsubara - uploaded by Tomer T - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 22:40, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 22:40, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 00:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great. -- -donald- (talk) 05:52, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Sorry, not great to me. Nowadays, our bird FPs have more definition in more of the feathers. I'd at least like to see a really sharp head. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan Kekek --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:50, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 11:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Galápagos Sally Lightfoot crab (Grapsus grapsus).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2020 at 10:05:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Grapsidae (Marsh Crabs)
Info A couple of nominations that are not my usual portraits. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 10:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charles (talk) 10:05, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lack of sharpness. --Ivar (talk) 10:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good composition, nice colors. Head out of focus -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info The galley is fixed. You need to have the whole section heading or it won't link properly. --Cart (talk) 12:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Back to basics!! Charles (talk) 15:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Paine's flasher wrasse (Paracheilinus paineorum) (40420276722).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2020 at 06:27:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Labridae_(Wrasses)
Info created by Rickard Zerpe - uploaded by Christian Ferrer - nominated by Ivar (talk) 06:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:27, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very colorful. Small picture, but the fish is only approximately 55 mm per this PDF. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Googling this fish, it looks as if the colours here are way oversaturated. Charles (talk) 09:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 11:59, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Charles, but since this is from Flickr, I don't think we can get a new version of it (I know Richard's mother, but that is not the right way to approach him about photos). Underwater photos are too tricky to de-saturate in the right way from jpeg so I wouldn't even try. --Cart (talk) 18:12, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

A Google Image search returns some others with bright colors. No strong opinion on this one from me, though. Mainly commented because I know Richard's mother, but that is not the right way to approach him about photos is not something I would've expected to read on Commons. :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 03:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sweden is a small place. Also: Hey, it's me, you should expect the unexpected. :)

Seriously, yes these fishies are colorful, but this is too much. The underwater light makes the over-saturated areas "bleed" over and blend with other areas. Too hard to separate the colors with only the jpeg to work with, might be impossible even with raw. --Cart (talk) 04:16, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Rhododendrites. I'd like to hear from anyone who's seen this fish in person. For now, I'll keep my supporting vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral Googling this fish, the species has iridescent colors. Many ones look similar. It is possible the saturation has been slightly increased, but not at a crazy level. And also note the background is darker than in most of the available similar images, which means a natural contrast can produce this effect. Now the saturation can be dialed down a bit, even though it's a naturally beautiful specimen 🐠. Nice and sharp picture, with metadata, but not huge in size -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:38, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Ivar (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Ivar (talk) 18:34, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:A Late evening view to Austnesfjorden at Sildpollnes Church, Austvågøya, Lofoten, Norway, 2015 April.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 11:55:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Norway
Info A well-composed image and one that I find faintly magical in terms of atmosphere, with the warm lighting of the church making a lovely contrast with the stormy surroundings. created by Ximonic - uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 11:55, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 13:54, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support shame about those power lines, though. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:25, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The crop is not great, 50 % of the image is uninteresting foreground. —kallerna (talk) 14:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 15:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 15:50, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:16, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:19, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The foreground adds to the eerie desolation of the place. --Cart (talk) 17:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I quite like the foreground. It gives it that wet, Scandinavian feeling. --Podzemnik (talk) 18:31, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not a clue what you are talking about...--Cart (talk) 19:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak Support Very nice but definely too much foreground. An alt version could help here Poco a poco (talk) 20:20, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I, too, think there should be less of the foreground. I'll post a suggested crop for consideration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:39, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I actually posted two possible crops, one more radical than the other. Both would be better than this version, in my opinion, and then it's a matter of taste. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:43, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The first crop looks nice to me, with the lake not cut. Now the foreground is too dominant. That would be the photographer's choice, though -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:45, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, of course. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:01, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:36, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:10, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:44, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart, although I think it could work just as well with the crop if people want it. Daniel Case (talk) 21:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:36, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:35, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:14, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Norway

File:James Hetfield with Metallica -- 7 October 2004.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 05:30:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
Info created by DallasFletcher - uploaded by DallasFletcher - nominated by Editor-1 -- Editor-1 (talk) 05:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is an image that can't be reproduced, it is exception.--Editor-1 (talk) 05:30, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - What a dramatic moment! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:52, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not very good quality, nothing is really sharp, and the resolution is quite low. I would suggest to nominate it at QIC first to see if it can be a QI. Here the strong light behind doesn't impress me much -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:01, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - It is taken with w:en:Canon EOS-1D Mark II, a 8.2 megapixel DSLR camera in 7 October 2004, its quality is enough and fair. That strong light comes from a firework, it is not unusual and unnature.--Editor-1 (talk) 08:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Old photo yes, and nothing special in it to make it featured today -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It's also over 15 years old, so it's not really a photo "of the times", I feel.--Peulle (talk) 07:26, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I don't know how to interpret that comment. It's arguably already a historical photo, then. Is that bad? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:57, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I'm sorry I don't understand your opinion.--Editor-1 (talk) 08:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Clarification: This is a well-known band, but it's not an important event, such as their last concert, the last performance of the artist or something special that makes this particular photo stand out. Unless taken at a very important date/event, I don't see the point in nominating a +15 year old photo.--Peulle (talk) 11:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Events would be much more fitting than Commons:Featured pictures/People#People_at_work (although it might be time to think about splitting off a separate gallery for concert photography …). --El Grafo (talk) 10:35, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done - agree, thank you.--Editor-1 (talk) 10:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed Per El Grafo's excellent suggestion we now have Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing. Looking at the photos in that gallery, the name is chosen to keep it separate from photos of crowds and audiences at concerts, and pure portraits of musicians and singers. Also it can be hard to draw the line between street performers and events. Gallery in nom fixed. --Cart (talk) 11:43, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

awesome, thanks! --El Grafo (talk) 12:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --The photo is not excellent, but I find the subject of the photo exceptional. PROPOLI87 (talk) 10:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 10:27, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support When explaining what makes a FP, I usually say something about there being a technical aspect, an educational aspect, and something like a "wow" factor, and that excelling in one area can make up for shortcomings in others. This is a good example of an image that probably isn't a QI, but should be a FP. It captures the drama and intensity and indeed "wow" of a performance by an extremely notable musician/band in a way that compensates for the technical problems. A photo taken today would be something different -- a band of middle aged musicians who probably can't perform like they did in 2004. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:37, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was on the fence about this one but Rhododendrites tipped me over. --Cart (talk) 14:56, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:40, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, and the microphone is distracting --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:15, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - @Uoaei1: Hello, it is a live performance, why you think "the microphone is distracting"? there is need to only 2 or 3 support vote, I will be grateful if you and others change your opinion, making this photo a featured picture does not hurt anybody and any thing, it is really interesting and nostalgic, Metallica will never have such performance again.--Editor-1 (talk) 09:05, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Now this is a really interesting discussion, and both pro and contra arguments are very good ;–). While (or because?) this photo is completely different from everything I normally like (and strive for) in photography, I am convinced by Rhododendrites. --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 01:55, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Rhododendrites. It definitely has some technical shortcomings, but to me they are outweighed by capturing the literal and figurative explosiveness of Metallica onstage closer to their peak years than they are now. Daniel Case (talk) 05:44, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Absolutely fabulous. --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:15, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captures Metallica so well. Abzeronow (talk) 17:29, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:36, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk)

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People#Musicians and singers performing

File:Model Rosie on a bed - In Black and White (14192377223).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Mar 2020 at 13:05:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created by Lies Thru a Lens on Flickr - uploaded by Tm - nominated by Cvmontuy -- Cvmontuy (talk) 13:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cvmontuy (talk) 13:05, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great photograph, ~~but not the filename. And I don't think the long long story in the description respects the project scope~~ -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:32, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Since the author is not active on Commons, I've fixed the name and cleaned up the info on the file page. This is something that should have been done before making the nomination. --Cart (talk) 13:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now this is a real model photo. Much in the style of Richard Avedon. --Cart (talk) 14:02, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose: I thought I'd support after seeing the preview, but alas, half of her face is quite overexposed. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 16:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment That overexposition here helps to show the face like an abstraction, look at the eyes, the image is beautiful --Cvmontuy (talk) 16:49, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support IMHO done very well and sensitively; without the slight overexposure it would be worse. --Aristeas (talk) 18:04, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 18:29, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty Poco a poco (talk) 20:18, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support An excellent sharp photo, overexposion is correct done, but what are those white squares in her eyes? --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:47, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Reflections of a soft box. --Cart (talk) 21:58, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very sharp and well composed portrait. Cmao20 (talk) 22:13, 3 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 00:14, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:50, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I was unsure about the overexposed areas, but the discussion here convinced me. Very beautiful model and photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:15, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:33, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:04, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:49, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:52, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 22:09, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow for me, the composition is pretty insignificant, The background is pretty trivial. I don't like the big hand up front --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 22:23, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Moroder. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:41, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:34, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 19:52, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women

File:Green and luminous paddy fields under dark clouds, in Don Det.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2020 at 02:16:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Laos
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:16, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I just love your pictures of paddies! I think someone should make a book with all your photos of paddies. This one in particular is quite dramatic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:25, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:12, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 04:27, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support maybe a bit too much sky --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:35, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:28, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 09:55, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I was happy to remember we now have a gallery Agriculture, then totally neglected the country, sorry. Your input will save time later, I appreciate -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I will only nag people with this info message a while longer until nominators are used to this new system. It's the best way to get this new gallery info to users since so many (not you) don't read talk pages or generally ignore info that is not directed at them. --Cart (talk) 13:42, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cart (talk) 09:55, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:03, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 20:48, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:34, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:58, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The quality is good but the grass is too blurry.--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 11:42, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 17:01, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 02:00, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Junior Jumper--shizhao (talk) 13:37, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very dramatic photo. Cmao20 (talk) 22:02, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:35, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment May rather fit into Natural_phenomena#Clouds category. --Kreuz schnabel 20:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Why not. You can change yes if you want. I'm neutral. Thanks for your suggestion -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:10, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:05, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Agriculture#Laos

File:Rhododendron ponticum actm 04.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2020 at 06:11:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Ericaceae.
Info Rhododendron ponticum. Inflorescence.
All by me -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:11, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:11, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:15, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 08:54, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 09:52, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Bijay chaurasia (talk) 12:56, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - George Chernilevsky ^talk 13:02, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:33, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:38, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 20:29, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 20:44, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:33, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:11, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 21:15, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:49, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 09:50, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 22:03, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good shot. --Mile (talk) 10:38, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support lots of detail. Charles (talk) 21:55, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:26, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lacks wow. —kallerna (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:33, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 12:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Ericaceae

File:Khalili Collection Kimono 02.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 Mar 2020 at 14:26:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects#Clothing_and_textiles
Info created by the Khalili Foundation. This is the first high-resolution image shared by the Khalili Collections' GLAM partnership- itself special because it is the first GLAM partnership with a private collection. This is a professionally-taken photograph. - Uploaded and nominated by MartinPoulter -- MartinPoulter (talk) 14:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MartinPoulter (talk) 14:26, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry but taken as a whole, this does not add up to an FP for me. Yes, kimonos are hard to shoot since you need a real studio for them (they are big when spread out), but this file is rather small for such a garment and the details are on the soft side. The kimono itself is nice but not so exceptional as to make up for the photo quality, the black cutout background not well done and it deprives the furisode of grace and volume. A kimono photo usually looks better when it is seen on some stand in a room. I know I might be too picky about this, but I collect kimonos and the only reason they don't show up here is because I don't have a room big enough with good light to shoot them in. --Cart (talk) 23:32, 4 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --shizhao (talk) 13:35, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Beautiful artwork and I'd love to support this but I think Cart is right, it doesn't compare to the best of FP in resolution or detail. I also agree about the background. Cmao20 (talk) 22:05, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 22:36, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Update: there has been a recent batch upload of kimono pictures from this source, and it includes a somewhat higher-resolution version of this image without the black cutout background, so I've overwritten the version that was submitted. @Daniel Case, Cmao20, and W.carter: would you like to take a look at the new version? Thanks for all feedback. MartinPoulter (talk) 13:50, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, still not enough. The sharpness could be better and there are marks on the wall. I keep comparing this to File:Modern furisode kimono with printed pattern.jpg, a modern furisode I just shot in my living room. I don't consider my shot good enough for FPC and expect more from such a prestigious museum. --Cart (talk) 14:28, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 15:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dolmen de Coste-Rouge (1).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2020 at 20:21:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 20:21, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 20:21, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 20:41, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support a bit soft but Obelix would approve, so... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:26, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sharpness and lighting (sky). Charles (talk) 12:02, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:12, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The sky seems unnatural, like overprocessed. Also, dull light -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:27, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light and busy composition makes it hard for the subject to stand out. Daniel Case (talk) 15:05, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 23:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Etangs de Bassies 08.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2020 at 20:18:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Ariège
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 20:18, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 20:18, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed per above. --Cart (talk) 20:45, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not different from 1 and 2 -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The light isn't too great ... nice view otherwise. --Peulle (talk) 09:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good but not exceptional recording. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:16, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 15:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 23:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:William-Adolphe Bouguereau (1825-1905) - Song of the Angels (1881).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2020 at 17:07:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Religion#Christianity
Info created by William-Adolphe Bouguereau - uploaded by Themadchopper - nominated by JeBonSer -- JeBonSer (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JeBonSer (talk) 17:07, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 17:49, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp enough --Michielverbeek (talk) 00:03, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Also lots of color noise. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:25, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 09:25, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Cayambe (talk) 10:36, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes, could be much better. Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 23:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:The meeting of day and night in a mountain valley - photomontage.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 Mar 2020 at 02:31:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Computer-generated#Other
Info created by Vian - uploaded by Vian - nominated by Killarnee --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:31, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•R•P) 02:31, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question - This can't be a single photograph, right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:16, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No. But it looks like this user enjoys cooking his photographs with extra magic milky way powder (1, 2, 3, 4, 5...) -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:08, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It's nice, but very unnatural and file description was misleading (I added additional information). --Ivar (talk) 07:04, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fake colors, strong vignetting -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:07, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info I have corrected the gallery since it belongs in the same place as photos like File:Photomontage (Forggensee Panorama) -2.jpg. --Cart (talk) 09:38, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak experimental support With image programs getting better and better, this photo is one of a trending art-form, surreal photography, that is starting to generate some internationally recognized artists. One of the most noted is Swedish Erik Johansson with works like Full Moon Service and even one of the most "hot" photographers right now, Chinese Chen Man, is doing layered collages in this genre (like her version of the Eight Immortals or other versions of Chinese iconography) or acclaimed Annie Leibovitz with her fairy tales photos.. This image looks like it could be inspired by Erik's Daybreaker. This nom's author seems to be quite good at this art-form and I think this could be a candidate to represent it among the FPs. We have other modern computer art images like manga and fractals, so why not some of surreal photography. BUT, it should be made very clear that these images are fantasy creations and they should be restricted to categories for art. Placing this in categories like "Astronomy" is wrong and downright deceptive, and I urge Vian not to mix works like this in categories with normal photos plus state very clearly on the file pages that these are montages. Perhaps also mention how many photos were used, locations for the originals and something about the technique used to create them (just like Erik Johansson does). --Cart (talk) 10:32, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support All per Cart :) - Benh (talk) 10:59, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The boundaries between photography and painting are becoming increasingly blurred. But there are some mistakes in this Disney-like scene. When the sun is in the sky like here you don't see any stars and when you see them then they are not as big as potatoes. I personally miss the unicorn.--Ermell (talk) 17:12, 5 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's really here though :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:01, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
🌸 Would be even more striking with a bit of Care Bears rainbow :-) I propose this alternative. Since last Picture of the year was also a fake image (photomontage with blue sky coming from another sequence), I think we have here a good candidate for the next POTY :-) Because the voters will not read the caption, they will simply decide quickly whether or not it's a wow-supernatural-landscape FP-promoted! Yeah -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Basile Morin: I love your alternative. --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We should credit Robin A Smile for this super kitsch artwork :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:27, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Category added, thanks for reminding me. Even if it is kitsch, we have articles about such art too. File renamed for clarity. --Cart (talk) 10:34, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome -- Basile Morin (talk) 13:16, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, Cart, for renaming the file, and all the work on the categories! Now I feel better about this image ;–): It is easier to see (for everybody) what this image is (and what not). --Aristeas (talk) 15:28, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For everybody 🌈🦄✨️ :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:18, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Per Cart. --Podzemnik (talk) 01:04, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't think there's anything wrong with a photomontage per se, as long as it's clearly marked out as one. But I'm not sure I actually like the photo. It's very well done technically but it just looks so unreal that it bears no relation to what you'd ever see in real life, and I don't find that beautiful. To me photography is about capturing reality in unusual and beautiful ways, not about creating a fantasy landscape that has only a tangential relationship with reality. Cmao20 (talk) 22:09, 6 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Like drawings, paintings, 3D artworks, videos, and all kinds of media, photomontages are of course fully acceptable, as long as their purpose is clear. And Erik Johansson is a good (but here misleading) example of what would be great to promote in FP. Unfortunately this work is far far from this genius. On the contrary, it exactly follows the non-original track of the current trend, facilitated by all the modern ways of production for such unreal-overprocessed-and-oversatured landscapes (Instagram, and many popular mobile apps). That's a question of taste, but of laziness also for the observers who just resign to celebrate the current fashion. Let me guess this photomontage won't last long. Proof of the lack of creativity is that the same technique with the same kind of sentimental scenery was repeated many times without diversity. Is it a style? Yes, it seems so. As a result, this work is "kitsch" in its main (and sorry, pejorative) meaning (Wikipedia): "it implies that the work in question is gaudy, or that it serves a solely ornamental and decorative purpose rather than amounting to a work of what may be seen as true artistic merit." Another proof is the unclear intention of the uploader. And that's very important. Since you can consider the work of your own child as a sublime piece of art, unfortunately as long as the drawing is not claimed as such by the author, that's your own imagination which goes too far. As I see this upload, like many others uploaded by the same user Vian, it was proposed as part of the Wiki Science Competition. And then was sorted by the jury in the Category:Obviously ineligible submissions for WSC 2017 in Ukraine. The wrong description also reveals the initial absence of artistic aim. Certainly a sentimental person with technical abilities, but definitely not a creator aware as suggested above. "Kitsch is, unlike art, a utilitarian object lacking all critical distance between object and observer." Ivar says "it's nice" (means cute in my view, not hurting any sensibility), Ermell says it's Disney-like (means the same I think), but frankly, this is not original. At least I've seen millions of similar images already. Much closer to this (over-saturated), than that (all natural! wow). Spot the error -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:18, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this expresses a lot of the points I was thinking about myself. The same uploader has produced many very similar photomontages that use identical techniques and that seem more or less interchangeable. This is not the sign of a great creative work of art. Cmao20 (talk) 07:35, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial vignetting also corrupts 50% of the content -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:18, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Surreal photography vs surreal reality 😂 -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:21, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Cart; I guess I can't complain since I've seen and photographed the the very real sight of the sun in the night sky (as have others in this discussion), the twain meeting, and I am glad this one is clearly identified as something that could never be seen in real life (at least on this planet).
But at the same time since POTY was mentioned ... it may be too late to do it this year (i.e., for 2019's images), but I think it is past high time we started awarding in categories (i.e., the ones we group the nominees in) as well as overall, and there should be a photomontage/photo illustration category for this and images like it. Daniel Case (talk) 03:37, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment A special POTY category for photomontages/photo illustrations would be a good idea. --Aristeas (talk) 09:31, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

With the way we do it, where the top two from each section are automatically finalists, some of the categories (like this hypothetical category) are rather small. Perhaps a broader "other"... — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:41, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~support~~ Seems like there was a section for posters of this sort of thing at the local mall (back in the 90s when I was at the age when one looks through posters at the mall :) ), but probably not actual photomontages. It feels a little dated as such, but supporting because it's a pretty effective instance of this sort of thing, and it's something we don't often see at FPC. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:52, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

back in the 90s when I was at the age when one looks through posters at the mall" Back in the 1990s when there were places in the mall to look through posters, you also mean. Daniel Case (talk) 04:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Having come back to this a couple times now, I just don't know if I can do it. Won't oppose, but can't support. :/ — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:53, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Not a great composition to me. I'm sort of reminded of movies that have great special effects but not much else. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:59, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao20. --Fischer.H (talk) 14:10, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Even for kitsch, there is just a bit too much of everything in this image: too much magic milky way powder, too artificial colours, etc. --Aristeas (talk) 14:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works for me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:09, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:49, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /✖️\ Basile Morin (talk) 05:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Marko Nikolich.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2020 at 09:46:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Marko Nikolić - Serbian football manager who last managed Hungarian club Fehérvár. created by --Biser Todorov (talk) 09:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC) - uploaded by --Biser Todorov (talk) 09:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC), nominated by-- Biser Todorov (talk) 09:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Biser Todorov (talk) 09:46, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nothing special about this photo of a football manager. Shooting the trainer is on the list of things to do around a match of every sports photographer, but then you try to catch him in moments of anger or joy or if he/she is waving to direct his/her players. --Granada (talk) 11:29, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose background. Why are you commenting, Granada? Are you happy to see this image promoted? Charles (talk) 11:59, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I still do not fully understand what makes an image outstanding so until I will I'm not gonna give pros or contras to images, just sometimes a comment. In my opinion the above photo is not outstanding, but if it should get promoted I hope I can learn to understand from the given votes. --Granada (talk) 10:01, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose a good picture, but no wow recognizable. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not special enough -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:57, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Granada's observations and I'm glad she lends her considerable experience with sports photos to commenting on such noms. Plus the background is distracting and the "halo" on his head is not flattering. --Cart (talk) 12:01, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. First, way too much empty background that adds nothing to the image. Second, really not that special as far as portraits go even if it were properly cropped, per others. Daniel Case (talk) 17:26, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This should be croped anyway. --Mile (talk) 11:16, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunlight through Nelumbo nucifera leaf (Sacred lotus).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2020 at 03:30:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Nelumbonaceae
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral nice, but imho not so good as this. --Ivar (talk) 11:06, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Different. I like both. Thanks for your opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:55, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose not up to FP standards. Seven Pandas (talk) 22:17, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose ... technical flaws, like that reddish halo around much of the leaf. Daniel Case (talk) 06:09, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /-Basile Morin (talk) 09:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Waterworks Museum (85472)bw.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2020 at 00:12:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Machines
Info Steam condenser at a defunct pumping station in Boston. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:12, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 00:12, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm impressed. Really! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:52, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:43, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reminds me of some classic films … and of some giant metal insect ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 14:06, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very special for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:40, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 20:56, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Zoomorphic pareidolia (proboscis) 🦟 -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:25, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you, Basile; this was the term is was looking for ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:32, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When I read your comment, I thought everyone has the same type of illusion :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:20, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:27, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 18:13, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:45, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 10:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Machines

File:Nutty squirrel (explored) - Flickr - hedera.baltica.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2020 at 12:20:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Sciuridae (Squirrels)
Info created by hedera.baltica - uploaded by Red panda bot - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 12:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- shizhao (talk) 12:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cute, but noise and low-res picture. --A.Savin 15:06, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin, plus strange bokeh (sharpening applied?) --Kreuz schnabel 17:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A.Savin. Also, nominating a photo with the "The categories of this image should be checked" still in place and the file not properly prepared is not really good. All the "boring" text on a file page should be as ready and correct as possible before you nominate it. --Cart (talk) 18:38, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. --Peulle (talk) 22:38, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 05:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I really like this photo and thank you for bringing it out, it’s cute, but for FPC, I fear it’s a lost case, sorry. --Aristeas (talk) 09:01, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Blind window with moss-covered stones in the ruined Khmer Hindu temple complex of Wat Phou, Champasak, Laos.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2020 at 01:53:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Other_windows
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 08:43, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not really seeing the big wow factor on this one, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 09:53, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Similar to 1 and 2, reason for this nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:25, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. Certainly a quality photo, but for whatever reason, the composition is not striking to me. I think the reason for my reaction is that the crop is narrow and doesn't breathe the way I want. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Good quality but not IMO striking or interesting enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 23:21, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Basile Morin (talk) 23:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Artamus superciliosus female - Bushells Lagoon.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2020 at 15:36:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Artamidae
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Ivar (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 15:36, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The focus is too much on the barbed wire. As a result, the top of the head and the back line of the bird are less sharp.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:34, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think the focus is OK on the head and body, but I'm never wild on birds on wires. Charles (talk) 17:44, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:32, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 20:32, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very sharp photo --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:40, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very sharp. Golden light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:10, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. I'm good with this bird on a rusty bit of barbed wire. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:13, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. I even like the rusty wire: It reminds us that this little creature does not live in paradise, but in a world dominated and endangered by human beings. --Aristeas (talk) 09:37, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I remember being told that Connolly Leather sourced its leather for Rolls-Royce from farms in Scandanavia that didn't use barbed wire. Charles (talk) 09:42, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Focus on eye coincides with focus on wire. --Axel ^(talk) 22:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 23:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:42, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 18:11, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cbrescia (talk) 19:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 2 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Artamidae

File:Catkin at BBG (78267).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2020 at 04:49:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Salicaceae
Info Salix (willow) catkins in early spring. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 04:49, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support a couple weeks ago, these willow catkins were all gray/white. when I saw them again over the weekend, they looked like this. I like that it feels like an eruption/explosion of springtime color bursting from inside the gray. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 04:49, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Missed "and section" the first time. Thought we were choosing from the galleries in that template now. Got it. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The galleries in "that template" are exactly the same as in the old link, COM:FP, but the structure is better displayed in the template and it's less chance that people will select one of the main pages (like Commons:Featured pictures/Places for example). --Cart (talk) 17:26, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Still pondering this. The 'thing' photo bombing the pic up right is bugging me. Any other color and placing of an ufo would have been better, since this can be interpreted as part of a winter-pale finger/hand in front of the lens. --Cart (talk) 17:29, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

What thing? :) New version uploaded. Given how blurred the background is, it doesn't seem like an overstep to just clone out that patch. Pinging both commenters just in case: W.carter, Basotxerri. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Hmmm... I could have sworn I saw something there... Oh, well, I'm getting old and should probably have my eyes checked. ;) --Cart (talk) 17:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:08, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Coold idea. --Podzemnik (talk) 23:22, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful natural colors. Visually the pattern is also very dynamic -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I still don't know how I feel about stuff being cloned out, but the results sure are excellent. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:47, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:44, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 18:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 22:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:40, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good photo Cmao20 (talk) 23:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:41, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Salicaceae

File:Reloj de flores, Stadtpark, Viena, Austria, 2020-01-31, DD 96-98 HDR.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2020 at 11:13:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Austria
Info Floral clock with the Kursalon Hübner in the back, Stadtpark, Vienna, Austria. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 11:13, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 11:13, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:47, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:29, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lower tree fence prevents seeing the garden completely and elements of the garden prevent seeing the construction, perhaps this is the type of photography where a drone is necessary --Wilfredor (talk) 22:55, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I fully understand Wilfredor's objections, but to me, this is a per se good composition, and it's very colorful. The juxtapositions amidst the near-symmetry, the colors and taking the photo at the right time, when there's still some natural light but also the beautiful yellow spotlights on the statues and such make this featurable to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:39, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 14:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Clear FP to me - beautiful place and very nice composition and light. Sharpness is good too. Cmao20 (talk) 15:38, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:22, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Wilfredor. Sometimes you just cannot get into the right place for an FP shot. Charles (talk) 16:54, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:22, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Wildredor. Definitely a QI, but I just cannot get past that front wall. Daniel Case (talk) 18:47, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose very good atmosphere, but per others. Too much of the view is blocked. --Ivar (talk) 06:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support my home --Killarnee (T•1•2) 18:30, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per User:Wilfredor vote. -- Editor-1 (talk) 09:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Building with special light, but the sky lacks natural (overprocessed). If this version fails after the end of the voting period, I'd recommend to try an alternative version with the bottom cropped out. You still have the two needles of the clock, and the composition works much better in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:59, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 14:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#Austria

File:La Toussuire Ski Resort Wide.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2020 at 17:54:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#France
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Benh (talk) 17:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Mosaic of 16 photos stitched with Hugin using panini general projection. Has about 240° of horizontal FOV (I think a tad less). - Benh (talk) 18:34, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seasonal topic in northern hemisphere -- Benh (talk) 17:54, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I love that the low sun is making the shadows look like the small houses were skyscrapers, but are you really sure about that blue saturation (exif +28)? It is a bit overwhelming. --Cart (talk) 18:01, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It's hard to say... I have tried desaturate the blue channel but then the sky becomes grey-er. If I move the WB to warmer side, the snow becomes yellow... Give me a moment, I'll try to find a compromise. - Benh (talk) 18:05, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@W.carter: I think u were right. So I toned down the saturation. Thanks - Benh (talk) 18:09, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, now I can remove my sunglasses. :) And of course Support. Cool idea and good detail. The categories are a bit "all over the place", I'll see if I can help you with that. A {{Panorama}} tag with some info about how many photos where used and such, would be appreciated since I guess this is not a single shot. --Cart (talk) 18:21, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's a mosaic shot. I'm not really up to date about the templates, so thanks. I'll share the details. I gave a thought about categories, but couldn't find a better one amongst those I could choose from. - Benh (talk) 18:24, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cats fixed. Have look. --Cart (talk) 18:32, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You didn't change the "place" categories, but I still updated the one for this FP candidate. - Benh (talk) 18:38, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I left that to you since I thought that you knew better than me if it was a place where people were actually living (settlement) or just an event resort (other). --Cart (talk) 19:02, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Definitely a resort, so let's go for "other" :) - Benh (talk) 19:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Also toned down the clarity... was a bit over the top. - Benh (talk) 19:03, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting. --Podzemnik (talk) 23:20, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Impressive. This photo really moves. I love the curves and lines. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 07:46, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:45, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 14:48, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 18:08, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:22, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Impressive quality for drone shot (?). But isn't it quite distorted, especially in the lower corners? —kallerna (talk) 14:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is distorted. The panini projection mitigates the distorsion somehow (compared to a rectilinear) and still keeps shapes "true to what you'd see in reality" but doesn't do magic. You can check Google Maps to see how it is in reality. The drone is a Mavic 2 Pro, which comes with a very nice 1" sensor camera. Only it is a bit noisy (even by 1" standards), but that isn't a big issue in bright conditions. Since it's a mosaic, the quality "per size" is quite good. - Benh (talk) 14:11, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
There's about 200° of horizontal FOV (Hugin computed 240° but I cropped even further), so hard to avoid. I believe the stretching at the borders is similar to a 13-15mm rectilinear lens on a FF camera. - Benh (talk) 14:21, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Well done, unique stuff. Cmao20 (talk) 23:05, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 03:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Other#France

File:Nautical twilight sunset over Sandy Lake (DSCF3005).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 Mar 2020 at 21:33:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Canada#British_Columbia
Info by User:Trougnouf
Support -- Trougnouf (talk) 21:33, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The 'Alternative' option is for other versions of the original photo, such as crop, editing or other suggestions made by voters. It is not something you should start with right away. These are two different images and should be in two different nominations. Part of the nomination process is to be able to select the very best photo and present it. --Cart (talk) 22:00, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done thank you for the clarification. I removed the alternative part, this is the version I like most. --Trougnouf (talk) 22:03, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Neutral I like this picture, the environment and light, personally I have no problem with almost 30% of the photo being solid black and the moon and the trunk play a weight role in the composition, however, I think that there is missing some main element in the photo. --Wilfredor (talk) 22:53, 7 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Black landscape with a tiny moon in the distance -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:59, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The black area on the left is OK but the larger black area on the right impedes my eye movement and creates a negative kind of null area on the picture frame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:35, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this, I wouldn't have expected to enjoy a picture that's almost completely dark like this so much, but it's brave to have taken a photo with such little natural light. The colours and atmosphere are subtle and add a special mood. Overall this is different enough from the usual fare to feature. Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark. —kallerna (talk) 17:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Kallerna too dark --Michielverbeek (talk) 00:07, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 09:34, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Like Cmao, I thought that after a good look I'd probably oppose as too dark. But you know what? This is how we really see, and remember, these scenes. This is late dusk, this is dusk at nautical twilight as the remaining daylight clusters around the recent sunset as it prepares to retreat from the night. Looking at this I feel the slight (perhaps) evening chill and think of how splendid the day must have been. Daniel Case (talk) 20:15, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Auerbach Kirche Innen-20190815-RM-160503.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2020 at 11:49:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info created & uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Junior Jumper -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 11:49, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 11:49, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:03, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 18:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:06, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nom Junior Jumper.--Ermell (talk) 21:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:04, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:29, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Starts losing it a little bit near the edges, but nowhere near enough to not be FP. Daniel Case (talk) 03:50, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Sahand Ace 07:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I do think there's too much ceiling and not enough floor though. Looks slightly unbalanced. But yes, this is a solid church interior. Cmao20 (talk) 23:07, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 14:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany

File:Bee on flower early spring 2020 in Florence - 1 -.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2020 at 09:28:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family : Apidae (Bumble Bees, Honey Bees, Carpenter Bees, Cuckoo Bees, Orchid Bees, and Stingless Bees)
Info created, uploaded and nominated by PROPOLI87 (talk) 09:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 09:28, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info I fixed the nom, but you will want to be more specific on the category. - Benh (talk) 09:53, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks Benh, and I agree, we need to know what kind of bee it is and preferably what flower it is too. An FP is not just the photo, it is also all the information about it so it can be used in the right articles and other places. --Cart (talk) 12:10, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I updated the caption. It is a European bee (Apis mellifera) extracting nectar from a Maonia flower - Mahonia aquifolium using its trunk. Small hairs that cover the bee's body maintain a slight electrostatic charge, causing pollen from the flower's anthers to stick to the bee, allowing pollination when the bee moves to another flower. Thank you PROPOLI87 (talk) 14:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 14:12, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I've fixed the gallery for you. We need the right section on the page since a Bot is doing the sorting now. --Cart (talk) 14:54, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. PROPOLI87 (talk) 14:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 14:59, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - I'd support this for QI, but I don't find anything great about the composition, so no support for FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:26, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 06:10, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:35, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 14:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:SL Sinharaja Forest asv2020-01 img13.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2020 at 14:12:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Sri Lanka
Info Detail of a waterfall in the Sinharaja Forest Reserve (World Heritage Site) --- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 14:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 14:12, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Nice quality but I'm not sure about the composition. I think I'd prefer to see a wider view, this looks like a very focussed crop of a more interesting image. Cmao20 (talk) 15:42, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Messy composition. —kallerna (talk) 17:00, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The pattern of the water jets and the pattern and colours of the rocks go well together.--Ermell (talk) 19:01, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support agree with Ermell. --Cart (talk) 20:47, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, no wow, dull light -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:01, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ermell. I assume that the light is as it is because this is mid in the woods. --Aristeas (talk) 09:28, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty good, but the light is still not wonderful, I think.--Peulle (talk) 09:34, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle--shizhao (talk) 12:26, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The colors appeal to me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:45, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per kallerna; I think this might have been better with a longer exposure. Daniel Case (talk) 20:16, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile Morin. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:12, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I'm sorry this photo is so unpopular. I find it a really good composition, both as a small "full-page" image and in detail. I love all of the lines and motion and the various colors of the rocks and mosses, and the light is perfectly fine for portraying the scene. Perhaps it's rather painterly, and that's one reason I like it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:43, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I understand the oppose but somehow I think it has something special. --Dinkum (talk) 08:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Messy composition! Habitator terrae 🌍 22:04, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:31, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Putra Mosque being reflected in the lake.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 Mar 2020 at 21:57:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Malaysia
Info created & uploaded by Azuladnan - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 21:57, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Reflection in the water is not beautiful enough for FP --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:50, 8 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ to me it is... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:27, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Water not still enough. Charles (talk) 12:00, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michielverbeek. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:08, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I suggest a tighter crop (see note). Too much empty space for now -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:33, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alt

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Malaysia
Info created & uploaded by Azuladnan - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:48, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment added optional crop. Tomer T (talk) 09:48, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 09:48, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this crop, and the overall impression. --Aristeas (talk) 14:08, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light. I like the juxtaposition of the two buildings with their reflection -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:07, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This version was exported without any metadata information Support Much better, thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 00:21, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see why missing EXIF is a criteria to decline an FPC --Poco a poco (talk) 19:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose as above. Charles (talk) 16:18, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral due to lack of metadata. Daniel Case (talk) 17:23, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- @Wilfredor and Daniel Case: this was already fixed by Basile Morin. Tomer T (talk) 20:15, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:37, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Except for the domes, this is a somewhat austere photo, but I think it's deserving and in fact, quite good. I hope it gets some more love. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:57, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 19:08, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support better --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:00, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the highest resolution for an FP but still OK. Cmao20 (talk) 23:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:20, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Malaysia

The chosen alternative is: File:Putra Mosque being reflected in the lake (crop).jpg

File:Goémonier de Plouguerneau 30-08-2015-402.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 10:38:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by S. DÉNIEL - uploaded by S. DÉNIEL - nominated by S. DÉNIEL
Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't really like this profile view very much; a bit more facing towards the camera would have been better IMO.--Peulle (talk) 12:41, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose As is always the problem with reenactment photos, there is usually some modern thing ruining the ambiance of image. Here, for me, it is that modern-looking earring. I also doubt that the goémonier women wore such finery when they were out working. --Cart (talk) 16:45, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle and Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 18:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 13:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pivsko jezero (by Pudelek) 01.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 13:47:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Montenegro
Info all by Pudelek -- Pudelek (talk) 13:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Pudelek (talk) 13:47, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 15:11, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The view is nice but the foreground uninteresting and the sharpness of the lake could be better. I'd have definitely zoomed to get rid of the disturbing foreground Poco a poco (talk) 19:12, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry per Poco, too much uninteresting foreground --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I like the overall form and I'm considering supporting the nomination, but the crop of the trees in the foreground does seem kind of random to me. Is there anything you can do about that? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:48, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per Poco. Framed the way it is, it's a QI but not an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 20:39, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above - good quality image but it is definitely more QI than FP to me, it's a beautiful place but it doesn't stand out that much, and the light could be more interesting. Cmao20 (talk) 23:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tuinen Mien Ruys (d.j.b.) 20.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 Mar 2020 at 16:06:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Rosaceae (cultivar)
Info Rosa 'New Dawn' is a climbing rose with wonderfully scented flowers. The flowers of the Rosa 'New Dawn' are soft pink and fade to almost white. Petals for the stamens are often seen with half-filled roses.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:06, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:18, 9 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 00:22, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:37, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 11:38, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lack--shizhao (talk) 12:25, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose it's nice, but imho doesn't stand out among FP Rosaceae category. In other words (what Shizhao supposedly want to say) it lacks wow. --Ivar (talk) 16:14, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A QI but not up to our FP standards. Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sharp image, but the light is not very interesting. Also a normal flower, not special in itself. It lacks wow -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, I've too agree Poco a poco (talk) 19:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 10:06, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar; typically good quality but not your most interesting photo IMO. Cmao20 (talk) 23:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vista de Ålesund desde Aksla, Noruega, 2019-09-01, DD 16.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 19:22:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Norway
Info General view of the city of Ålesund from mountain Aksla, Norway. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 19:22, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:22, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice but is the far away horizon supposed to tilt that much? --Cart (talk) 19:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Certainly not, I fixed the tilt, Cart, thanks for the hint! I also cropped it a bit overall Poco a poco (talk) 20:07, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot of a town in Norway --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:33, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 22:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great view, beautiful facades in the foreground -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good image.--Editor-1 (talk) 05:16, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 09:04, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 10:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:08, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:59, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The colourful facades of the buildings are what makes this photo. I might have wished for a little more space at the bottom, but this is quite good enough for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 23:16, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although I, too, would have appreciated more space at the bottom. But not much more, and TBH I really don't know how you could frame this any differently. Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 18:11, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zcebeci (talk) 17:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Norway

File:Wandeling over het Hulshorsterzand-Hulshorsterheide 07-03-2020. (d.j.b) 20.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 16:37:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Pinaceae
Info Walk across the Hulshorsterzand/Hulshorsterheide. Sand was blown away between the tree roots. This 'artwork' was created by influences from nature.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:37, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support For once the file title with the "Wandeling over het..." is absolutely correct. This pine is clearly out walking over the Hulshorsterzand-Hulshorsterheide. :) --Cart (talk) 16:50, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 17:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Yes, Cart, but luckily no motion blur visible in the roots. I'm minded to support this if the perspective is corrected (unless the trees are all bent) Charles (talk) 20:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for your comment. On this hill it is a jumble of trunks, branches and tree roots. Nothing is really right. The photo was taken on the tripod. With built-in spirit level.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The level is not the issue, just that from this angle you inevitably get perspective distortion. I find it distracting. Charles (talk) 09:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:34, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:57, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 08:55, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Spurzem (talk) 11:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- very interesting Seven Pandas (talk) 11:51, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:08, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 09:23, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:55, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Slightly qualified support A nice ent-ry , but I think it could be cropped in on the left (see note). Daniel Case (talk) 02:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tibet Nation (talk) 00:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The whole tree would be nice. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Pinaceae

File:White-fronted bee-eater (Merops bullockoides) Namibia.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 14:44:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Meropidae (Bee-eaters)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 14:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charles (talk) 14:44, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice exemplar Poco a poco (talk) 19:13, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:53, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:22, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 08:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 08:57, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question - Pretty bird! How big is it? The Wikipedia article doesn't say. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:44, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Just checked my Helm Field Guide. It says 23m. Wow! A typo perhaps. It's 23cm (9 in). 19:46, 14 March 2020 (UTC)

Support - So still a relatively small bird. 23 m would be like a big whale! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:14, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Obvious FP. Cmao20 (talk) 23:13, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Axel ^(talk) 18:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Square is a good choice! Habitator terrae 🌍 15:16, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 22:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Meropidae (Bee-eaters)

File:Twenty meter tape measure 3.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 01:45:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools
Info One of the more challenging sections to fill in the 'Objects' gallery is the 'Tools' section since they are usually boring everyday things. But it is also fun to try and think of some way to make it more interesting. Such as twenty meters of tape measure. Probably a lost cause, but I'll give it a try. The background paper is mottled IRL. -- Cart (talk) 01:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 01:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nicely done. Not what I would add to an article such as “Maßband”, but a very well executed image. I like the lighting a lot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did normal WP photos of it too; no wow there. :-) The light is from two small LED photo lights. Cheap but quite effective for product shots. --Cart (talk) 11:35, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose Indeed, it's quite challenging to make an FP out of a tape measure. I really like what you've done here, Cart, but unfortunately there is not enough wow here for me. Sorry! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 03:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 10:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral nice composition but I don't like the background dark areas. Tomer T (talk) 11:57, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Really nice idea, but Oppose per others, especially Tomer T. The dark background inhibits the movement of my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Maybe not the most interesting subject but I can't think of any way to do this better. Cmao20 (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I suspect we're going to be seeing more photos like this (as opposed to, say, popular tourist sites) for the next few months ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not all subjects can made "interesting" or aesthetically pleasing. Also, tape measure should not be used or stored like this, thus not the best way to illustrate the subject. —kallerna (talk) 08:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lack of wow for me here. --Ivar (talk) 16:55, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 18:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above --Ermell (talk) 18:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Cart (talk) 19:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Reeds over a stream in Holma - bw.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 16:03:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Poaceae
Info Reeds are nice to work with in black and white since in high contrast, they come out resembling old traditional bamboo paintings. Sometimes even the light is reversible in these photos since with another light and background, the leaves become light and the background dark. I was briefly considering nominating this version, but since B&W is regarded as bad/evil by some users here, an inverted B&W photo would probably have me excommunicated from the forum. :) All by me, -- Cart (talk) 16:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 16:03, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Nice, but are the highlights blown? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:49, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is a term not usually associated with B&W photography since very white or very black areas are often a desired effect, like here. A blown area in a color photo is a part so bright that no color or detail can be detected in it, so more relevant with such. In high contrast B&W all bright and white areas become white, so technically half of the photo could be said to be "blown". Some reading. Think graphic print, without the high contrast here, this photo would be rather boring with only similar gray nuances, B&W often needs more contrast than color photos. --Cart (talk) 19:19, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Got it. So it's really a matter of taste how bright the viewer wants the highlights in each case. I do like some of the high-contrast pictures you linked and I think I voted for one or two of them. Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:31, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

And I guess my feeling is that I'd like the brightness of the whites to be toned down some, in this case. I feel like it's hindering eye movement, but I might change my mind later. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:33, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's a matter pf taste. Here I think toning down the white areas would make the photo lose it's crispness. Even if many of the old bamboo drawings I mentioned in the info have faded to yellow or even sepia, I like this to have a hint of freshly ground Chinese ink on rice paper. --Cart (talk) 22:52, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:56, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Perhaps nothing special in color, but a pleasing abstraction, almost like a fabric print, in greyscale. Daniel Case (talk) 20:45, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Painterly. Cmao20 (talk) 23:14, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing special and Overprocessed. The subject is not particularly interesting. Ordinary grass with a bit of water. Looking at the color version there's no clear potential for FP at the beginning. Then, the strong contrast of the post-treatment generates ugly dark parts with a lot of artifacts. The quality is not here. All the details were lost. Impression of blown highlights. The composition is also a bit boring, not wild enough. Reading the introduction, now I am an "evil" (even though I supported a B&W image last week), well... let's live evil :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose on some similar grounds to Basile. I'd say the water doesn't look much like water in this photo. I like the reeds more than Basile does, but the stream really doesn't help me move my eyes, even in the color version, which is IMO better in this case (but still not IMO an FP). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:38, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:19, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It took a while before I decided to comment on the photo. I like your other black and white choice better. But this photo also has something extra for me. I see it as a painting.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This doesn't appeal on composition or technical quality with the bright whites. Charles (talk) 19:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I do rather like what you're going for here. I wonder if taking the picture a little earlier in the day might actually be worth trying, for the increased contrast from the harsh sun maybe affording room to play around with shadows without fading the edges as much? Donno. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Rhod: The sun was actually very harsh when I took this. (Photo taken at the same time) This was taken smack in the middle of the Swedish summer when the sun hadly sets, so just looking at the time stamp might be confusing for a New Yorker. :) What made me try for something like this (and other photos of reeds) was the strong sunlight and here also that I had the reflection of a cloud in the stream which made the background brighter than the usual sky blue color, and it added to the contrast. I will keep experimenting with photos like this though, but I doubt they will show up here at FPC. One test is enough. --Cart (talk) 02:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Basile Morin. —kallerna (talk) 09:11, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles Poco a poco (talk) 18:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Ermell (talk) 18:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Cart (talk) 19:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Psephotus haematonotus male - Cornwallis Rd.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2020 at 23:30:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Order_:_Psittaciformes_(Parrots)
Info A colourful and high-resolution bird image from JJ Harrison. created by JJ Harrison - uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This is the only one of John's brilliantly-focused bird shots I can remember that's fuzzy. And the man-made perch isn't ideal for FP. Charles (talk) 19:07, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree. It should be crisper.--Peulle (talk) 22:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. The focus is not on the head. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 16:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Understood. I thought it was OK for 17.4mpx but you're right, JJ Harrison has better shots. Cmao20 (talk) 20:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 20:16, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:View of Otrobanda, Willemstad, Curaçao - February 2020.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 Mar 2020 at 07:59:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Curaçao
Info Early morning view of the district of Otrobanda, Willemstad, Curaçao, from Queen Emma Bridge, a pontoon bridge across St. Anna Bay. It connects the Punda and Otrobanda quarters of the island's capital. The bridge is hinged and opens regularly to enable the passage of oceangoing vessels - which takes only a few moments. All by me --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:59, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:59, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - All the arcs of the bridge are kind of mesmerizing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:10, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The houses framed by the arches fit well together. I find the many boards and the walkers unfavorable.--Ermell (talk) 09:56, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The boards are a feature, not a bug, imo, but that's a matter of taste. On the issue of the pedestrians crossing the bridge, well, I'd argue that they illustrate what it is actually built for without obstructing the view too much. I'm almost tempted to state that the bridge is basically empty, at least by its usual standards... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:11, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's quite a nice picture, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:54, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Not enough details--shizhao (talk) 12:23, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

excuse me?! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:56, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Ikan. IMHO this is just the right count of walkers, without any of them the picture could be somewhat lifeless. --Aristeas (talk) 14:02, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot. nice lines for me.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:38, 10 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Processing is a little rough on some of the background trees, but that's not too much of the image. Daniel Case (talk) 05:21, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:53, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see what you were looking for and I like the pattern of the arches, but the dark floor feels too dominant and not helping overall in the composition, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 19:05, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:29, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 09:25, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition Cmao20 (talk) 23:03, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Curaçao

File:Gauchos from up-country Tucumán province.png, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2020 at 19:52:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Printed#Book illustrations in color
Info created by Emeric Essex Vidal - uploaded by Ttocserp - restored/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 19:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 19:52, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The quality of the picture is too low and maybe need a white balance, i preffer original version --Wilfredor (talk) 14:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Wilfredor. Daniel Case (talk) 18:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Wilfredor. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:31, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 21:53, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Fath'Ali Shah Qajar- Sahand Ace.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2020 at 06:35:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1700-1800
Info created by Anonymous - uploaded and nominated by Sahand Ace -- Sahand Ace 06:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Sahand Ace 06:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 11:42, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment And we need a proper description, e.g. how old is the painting (?), its size and maybe a translation of the text. Besides, the resolution seems quite low. --Palauenc05 (talk) 12:40, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lacking context, sourcing to "pinterest" does not inspire confidence, and quite low resolution — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:31, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Rhododendrites. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Daniel Case (talk • contribs) 03:00, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lacks and context and not focused. CookieMonster755 (talk) 23:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 15:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Illuminated buildings in Akihabara, west side of Sotokanda 1 (2015-04-13 03.22.59 by IQRemix).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 09:59:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Japan
Info created by IQRemix from Canada - uploaded by Clusternote - nominated by Editor-1 (talk) 09:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

See "edited" version

~~Support~~ Maybe the cropped version might be better. -- Editor-1 (talk) 09:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per below Poco a poco (talk) 19:17, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It needs an enormous perspective improvement --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

cropped

If you are disagree with this one but have a better idea for a crop, please tell me to make it or do it yourself using Commons:CropTool. -- Editor-1 (talk) 09:59, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Or you could do some perspective correction and other small edits to make it comply better with the FPC image guidelines. --Cart (talk) 17:24, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks for that, I haven't skill to do such works.--Editor-1 (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Such a perspective in this case not working at all, tilted, quality at both sides drops significantly (due to the low DoF), the crop doesn't work to me in any of the both sides. I see FP potential here, but the picture needed a higher f-number (for which a tripod or a fixed surface would have been required) Poco a poco (talk) 19:16, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

edited

Support If you think it needs a crop, please tell.--Editor-1 (talk) 04:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose So much has been done here, but the depth of field is still shallow, there is ringing in the traffic lights and frankly the trees on the right look really weird. It looks better like this and in theory it is something I want to support but we have technically better night cityscape FPs. Daniel Case (talk) 03:57, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 15:38, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:سی و سه پل در شب.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Mar 2020 at 11:36:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Iran
Info created & uploaded by Yare zaman2000 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 11:36, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 11:36, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Any chance of getting the left and right crops to match better? --Cart (talk) 12:29, 11 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:19, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral per Cart; also it could be sharper. Cmao20 (talk) 23:04, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:19, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 15:39, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Jodenster van kledij.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2020 at 13:41:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing_and_textiles
Info Belgian version of the Yellow Badge, compulsory from 1942. Created by DRG-fan - uploaded by DRG-fan - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 13:41, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - QI, and should also presumably be a VI, but it's not an inspiring photo to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:00, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan, I think that a historical image with this badge could be an FP, but this is too simple --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Panthera. --Cart (talk) 12:59, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 03:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Red-tailed hawk (44371).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2020 at 14:22:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus_:_Buteo
Info Red-tailed hawk rescue. All by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:22, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful hawk, intense closeup. Is the bird injured above the eye? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:26, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks, and yes. It's a rescue, but I didn't hear its handler get any more specific than talking about "injuries". — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:29, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Dinkum (talk) 15:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The DofF is limited and I do find the injury off-putting. Charles (talk) 16:01, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The depth of field is perfect, but I agree with Charles about the injury. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 20:36, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I feel sorry for the poor bird with its injury, but it's a very beautiful creature and the image quality is good. Cmao20 (talk) 23:26, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support An excellent focus to the head of the bird --Michielverbeek (talk) 23:30, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 11:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 12:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nature is not always perfect --Llez (talk) 12:35, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Llez. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Daniel Case (talk) 16:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 19:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above. --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Per Charles and due to the overexposed areas --Poco a poco (talk) 18:40, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus_:_Buteo

File:Chacma baboon (Papio ursinus ruacana) backlit.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2020 at 10:09:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)
Info The flies are always there as the sun goes down. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 10:09, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charles (talk) 10:09, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed per above. --Cart (talk) 12:14, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I do like the ambiance in this. One of the few photos where you can "hear" the change in the nature sounds as the sun goes down. --Cart (talk) 12:39, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:01, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:50, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Killarnee (T•1•2) 18:07, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Isn't this a bit dark, even for a backlit subject? - Benh (talk) 19:31, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well in real life the animal looks black as you're looking into the sun. I guess it's a matter of taste. Charles (talk) 20:24, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it's totally fine if you like it like that. Just that from own experience, you can have both that bright outline and clearly see the subject in such situation. - Benh (talk) 22:40, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too dark -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:00, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support awesome! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:32, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:24, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Happy 2nd birthday, photo! I do love this limned look ... it's as if he will be making a dramatic entrance so the audience can be shocked to learn that he did not actually die in that plane crash several years ago ... Daniel Case (talk) 03:47, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Underexposed and harsh contrast, however, amazing composition --Wilfredor (talk) 00:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 09:24, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice idea to take a backlit photo like this. I wouldn't have expected it to come out well, but I'm very glad it did. Cmao20 (talk) 23:06, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Wilfredor. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /pandakekok9 13:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Cercopithecidae (Old World Monkeys)

File:Old city hall of Leipzig (21).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2020 at 09:13:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 09:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 09:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 11:43, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:50, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 18:04, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support This photo was made disrespecting the quarantine ? --Wilfredor (talk) 18:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Last year's photo. File description, EXIF, you know? --A.Savin 19:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info This photo I took in August 2019 for WLM 2019. Tournasol7 (talk) 21:20, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The state of Saxony has not announced a quarantine yet anyway... --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 19:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:51, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support XRay ^talk 14:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:52, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very good photo of its type and a pretty scene. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:53, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 10:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:34, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. Cmao20 (talk) 20:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 15:11, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Germany

File:Cyrtodactylus samroiyot, Sam Roi Yot bent-toed gecko - Khao Sam Roi Yot National Park (35827992064).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 Mar 2020 at 18:51:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Gekkonidae_(Geckos)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by B2Belgium - nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:51, 12 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:04, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Great photo, especially the head. This little gecko is at most around 7 cm exclusive of the tail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Half of the animal is out of focus. Charles (talk) 10:31, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:27, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 19:29, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dinkum (talk) 08:37, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:30, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Spurzem (talk) 11:43, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charles makes a fair point but enough of the gecko is sharp for me to support. Cmao20 (talk) 23:08, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 04:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support (Weak per Charles) Poco a poco (talk) 18:36, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:02, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Gekkonidae_(Geckos)

MRT SBK Semantan station2.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2020 at 21:10:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

A Siemens Inspiro EMU stock designed by BMW Group Designworks leaving SBK14 Semantan station.

Category: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport
Info created by Empatpuluh - uploaded by Empatpuluh - nominated by *angys* -- *angys* (talk) 21:10, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- *angys* (talk) 21:10, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Way too low resolution. --A.Savin 23:03, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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:Skyline of the Central Business District with the Old Parliament House in Singapore.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 04:43:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Singapore
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:43, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Great image! --Editor-1 (talk) 10:02, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 16:24, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 07:26, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:05, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:56, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose oversharpening resulting on noise artifacts. See sample note --Wilfredor (talk) 00:04, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sir it has the tag "This image has been assessed using the Quality image guidelines and is considered a Quality image." so image quality should not be a concern.--Editor-1 (talk) 16:28, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'm afraid the QI tag has no value these days... reviewers have different standards and if things haven't changed, one opinion is enough to promote. - Benh (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:15, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Old meets new. Cmao20 (talk) 23:09, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:49, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:26, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
weak oppose Of course good quality and great idea behind the picture, but the intended contrast between old and new, in my view, isn't really visible. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Per Habitator terrae. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 16:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely skyline and crisp image. CookieMonster755 (talk) 23:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose unfortunately per Habitator terrae. --pandakekok9 03:21, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /pandakekok9 08:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Singapore

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Erdbeerfeld -- 2015 -- 6482.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2020 at 19:15:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Germany
Info created by XRay – uploaded by XRay – nominated by Draceane — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 19:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose We already have File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Erdbeerfeld -- 2015 -- 6492-6.jpg as FP. I think one of these is enough. --Cart (talk) 19:32, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@W.carter: 2× OK. Should I withdraw the photo? I haven't noticed the promoted one. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:48, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is up to you, but I think some voters would see this the same way I do. --Cart (talk) 19:49, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per W.carter. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:56, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination I agree with Cart. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 18:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunrise on the Étang de Thau.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2020 at 23:25:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Hérault
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 23:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 23:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely! Cmao20 (talk) 23:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Great news, thanks you and thanks to Eatcha. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:29, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:18, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 14:59, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Is there a way to clone out the crane exactly in the middle of the image? it is at the spot where the lines are guiding to. I also believe that the image is tilted. The inclination of the river from left to right is too strong --Poco a poco (talk) 15:22, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks you for your review, no to the both requests. For the crane, not that I'm not able to do it, but I find that kind of correction a bit "too much", and it is already very near to be in the middle. Sadly, when I took the photo, I had coppice and brambles on my right and I could not place it in the middle. For the tilt I am not very favorable to make corrections, I am very carefull to use the internal camera horizontal level when I use my tripod, and I remember very well to have been very careful that time. Furthermore I just checked the file in lightroom, I did not make a single corrections (and it is verifiable by the size of the image, as it is the full wide size), and the crane which is almost in the middle is perfectly straight. Therefore a tilt will: 1/make me crop the image (and the wide scene is one of the key here, therefore there is more to lose than to win)), 2/ that will tilt the crane, and as it is in the middle I will have to apply strong unuseful perpective correction to recover the verticals... and all that knowing that I am sure to have put my camera horizontal level perfectly straight... Sorry dear colleague this is a definitive no. I don't know by what visual phenomenon but I'm pretty sure that the camera was horizontal, otherwise why the crane is not tilted? Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also think it should be slightly CCW rotated. Have learnt not to trust my camera level, so maybe urs is also faulty. - Benh (talk) 18:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

An horizontal line have to be horizontal only if (it is indeed horizontal in the reallity, and a lake bank is not the water level?!? is it? so why it should be horizontal??) you are in front of that line and you point your camera with a prefect 90°, hotherwise this horizontal line become... a perspective... this is not the sea, this is lake bank quite close of me and I'm not at altitude o, therefore the perspective exist...find an horizontal lake bank... Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:35, 21 March 2020 (UTC) and I still want to understand why the crane is not tilted. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:37, 21 March 2020 (UTC) and[reply]

Yes I did check Google Map before. The far coast is not necessarily horizontal but it look "enough perpendicular" to us so that I think it should appear near horizontal. So I'm not really sure. Guess u r right. Sorry for disrupting the nom :) - Benh (talk) 19:04, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it's a pleasure, sorry if I look a bit aggressive. It's simply that I don't do the things just because one says to me "do it", even if it have to cost me the success of a nomination here. I do the things when I understand the why of the how. And here I don't understand, if the photo (photo that has currently not a single tilt/perspective correction) is tilted, why the crane in the middle of the photo is perfectly straight. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:21, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No issue :) I'm fine with discussing facts. Here you make good points, that's all, so no more arguing :) - Benh (talk) 19:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The benchmarks in photography are more often verticals than horizontals...., excepted for obvious cases, the sea level, and some architecture cases when you are sure that you are perpendicular. Otherwise benchmarks are in almost all cases always the verticals because we know that they are indeed vertical. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:41, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support I have no problem with the water. I have "slanting" shores all around the fjords here. That's the way Nature is sometimes. --Cart (talk) 20:02, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:45, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination I will still try to correct this potential tilt issue, and therefore the perspectives too, but I don't plan to do it right now. Thanks you. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 06:51, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mexican pincushion (78303).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2020 at 01:24:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants#Family_:_Cactaceae
Info Flowering Mexican pincushion - all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose When you're going for simplicity (i.e. a centered, symmetric flower), it really needs to be free of distractions. Unfortunately, the shadow on the right and the cactus paddle do no wonders for the image. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Nice sharp image of a beautiful flower but I do find the big shadow on the right a bit distracting. Cmao20 (talk) 21:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per King of Hearts -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:16, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination — Rhododendrites ^talk | 04:18, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Abbaye de Cassan - Tower BW.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2020 at 23:23:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#France
Info created - uploaded - nominated by Christian Ferrer -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 23:23, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 23:23, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Good image but I actually prefer the colour version (linked to on the image page). Cmao20 (talk) 23:37, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 10:07, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

Neutral I prefer the BW. @Cmao20: Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 07:01, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 13:01, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Both are good and it's a close call but I prefer the color version. --GRDN711 (talk) 15:37, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support When the colours are so nice, there's no need to turn it into B&W. Subtle, but FP to me Cmao20 (talk) 16:32, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Seven Pandas (talk) 20:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 20:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pyrrhocorax graculus Glacier 3000.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2020 at 22:31:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Corvidae
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Gzzz -- Gzzz ^zz 22:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gzzz ^zz 22:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quite soft and the chough is looking away. --Podzemnik (talk) 04:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Podzemnik. --Peulle (talk) 08:53, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately I agree with Podzemnik. This is a good picture but we have had a lot of excellent head shots of birds, and I think we can afford to be discriminating about which ones we feature. The composition of this one is damaged a little by the fact that the bird is looking away. I don't think the sharpness is too bad, but overall I think it's a bit too ordinary for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 23:30, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Gzzz ^zz 22:06, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Achalciche Rabat interior 2019 3.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2020 at 19:47:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Georgia
Info created, uploaded and nominated by Karelj -- Karelj (talk) 19:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 19:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Note: I think perspective correction is needed.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry, but I believe, that perspective is OK. --Karelj (talk) 20:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Not for me. So much of it leans to the left. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Ikan and Famberhorst. A fascinating place but I can't see a straight vertical anywhere here. There is also some purple CA that needs correcting, and I think the sky is a bit washed out. All these fixes done and it could be an FP I think. Cmao20 (talk) 21:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very busy composition, and overexposed sky. Daniel Case (talk) 02:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:36, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Goémonier de Plouguerneau 30-08-2015-197.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 10:38:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by S. DÉNIEL - uploaded by S. DÉNIEL - nominated by S. DÉNIEL
Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 10:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Didn't look like much to me as a thumbnail, but when I blew it up, I liked it. I suppose people won't like that the boy is not looking at the camera, but it's really more about the seaweed on the tractor to me, and it works for me formally. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:36, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak support The composition, light, motifs in this series are absolutely lovely (it's like looking at a gallery of impressionistic paintings!), but the image quality not so. Mostly I suspect it's because of the rather strange camera settings (why ISO 100 on an overcast day with moving subjects) and post-editing (a lot of purple chromatic aberration). --Cart (talk) 11:46, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tractor and man blurred. Charles (talk) 14:38, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much fuzzy areas. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:20, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It's a pity for the beautiful composition that the tractor is not sharp. -- Spurzem (talk) 17:28, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per Spurzem. Daniel Case (talk) 18:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I like the composition very much but it would only be FP for me if the tractor were in focus. Cmao20 (talk) 23:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:37, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Lark Sparrow - Flickr - Becky Matsubara.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 09:25:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Info created by Becky Matsubara - uploaded by Red panda bot - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 09:25, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- shizhao (talk) 09:25, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Crop - and it suffers in comparison to the other barbed wire bird photo nom. Charles (talk) 10:30, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:50, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good photo but I don't think it stacks up to some of our best bird pics in composition, and the resolution is not very high either. Cmao20 (talk) 23:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral very good color choice, but not really special. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:21, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Dendrobates tinctorius var. azureus - Karlsruhe Zoo 04.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2020 at 13:44:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Ordo_:_Anura#Family_:_Dendrobatidae#Genus_:_Dendrobates
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 13:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 13:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit of a strong flash for me, but very nice catch (just wonder if that thing behind could be cloned out?) - Benh (talk) 14:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Done cloned out --Llez (talk) 14:44, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive Object, interesting formation of undergrund, featured picture. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 16:01, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I like the picture of the frog, but I'd suggest cropping some of the unsharp foreground, particularly because of all those blurred points of light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:43, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 17:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zcebeci (talk) 19:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 19:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question How come there's no reflection in the eye Llez? Charles (talk) 21:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Gorgeous! -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:16, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:45, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Almost psychedelic ... Daniel Case (talk) 18:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:29, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians#Ordo_:_Anura#Family_:_Dendrobatidae#Genus_:_Dendrobates

File:Louvre Courtyard, Looking West.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2020 at 05:02:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info created by Benh - uploaded by Benh - nominated by Paris 16 -- Paris 16 (talk) 05:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support But maybe need a crop at the bottom? -- Paris 16 (talk) 05:02, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ah! Been there, done that (not half as good). But per Paris16 --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question FoP in France! Is the Pyramid still "de minimis" (especially with a crop as proposed)? --Llez (talk) 09:07, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Still smaller than the similar subject FP even with the proposed crop. - Benh (talk) 09:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I'll support with bottom crop. Charles (talk) 09:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Charles (talk) 15:04, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hi, I actually thought about cropping the bottom (and Maybe even the sides). Will do that today. - Benh (talk) 09:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done Cropped bottom (and sides) - Benh (talk) 10:08, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info I made another cropped version here. But I think I have disrupted this nom enough for today. - Benh (talk) 11:34, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Already loved this when I saw it on Flickr --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 12:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 14:10, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great! --Aristeas (talk) 17:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 18:22, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 18:53, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 10:22, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 20:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent panorama, much better than the existing FP. Cmao20 (talk) 21:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hmmmm --Podzemnik (talk) 22:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:36, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:59, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France

File:Arenes de Nimes (19).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2020 at 06:25:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
Info created & uploaded by User:Tournasol7 - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - A photo of a Roman monument in what I think of as monumental style. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's a great shot, but two fixes would be welcome: 1. tone down the clarity, the subject is not that contrasty (and I've shot it several times, so I know) and 2. the verticals shouldn't lean outward. - Benh (talk) 06:49, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment a bit more of the interesting sky could further improve the image - and maybe a tighter crop at the bottom --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:58, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too similar to File:Arenes de Nimes (18).jpg. Same composition, light, subject, angle, just a little bit larger on both sides and shot three minutes later -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:39, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Basile is right; my mistake - I should have checked for other FPs of this subject before nominating. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:43, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Spider plant flowers and plantlet 2.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2020 at 12:05:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Asparagaceae
Info All by me, -- Cart (talk) 12:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 12:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The background kinda bothers me... also, only one of the flowers is sharp - I know it's meant to be that way, but in that case I'd prefer having a closeup of that flower only.--Peulle (talk) 13:59, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

To clarify: it's a house plant (at least in Sweden) so the background is a wallpaper indoors, not to be confused with outdoor nature settings. --Cart (talk) 14:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too much fuzzy areas. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose basically per above. Doesn't work out somehow --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:59, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Okey dokey. --Cart (talk) 08:58, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Arctic Wolf at the Grizzly & Wolf Discovery Center.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2020 at 00:24:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info created by Efly - uploaded by Efly - nominated by Efly -- Efly (talk) 00:24, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Efly (talk) 00:24, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Partially blocked by foliage, and the evergreen is sort of growing from his head. Plus, it would be nice to see the dog's entire body, unless you want to do a closeup of his head. This is neither. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alt

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info cropped. created by Efly - uploaded by Efly - nominated by Efly -- Efly (talk) 03:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Efly (talk) 03:10, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Still a distracting background. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this image, the background is OK for me. --Basotxerri (talk) 09:02, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not sharp enough for this 1,323 × 1,819 pixels image -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:42, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 04:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the background does not make sense with this photo. CookieMonster755 (talk) 23:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 09:04, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Common Raven at West Yellowstone.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 Mar 2020 at 23:54:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Corvidae (Crows, Jays and Magpies)
Info created by Efly - uploaded by Efly - nominated by Efly -- Efly (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Efly (talk) 23:54, 13 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I haven't decided, but this one is better. Are those dust spots or unsharp cones of an evergreen? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:03, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I think some are dust spots. I've tried to remove them. Thanks! --Efly (talk) 02:25, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - Is the purple on part of the upper part of the bird's beak CA or is it actually how that part of the beak looks with sunlight hitting it? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:42, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support Nice shot but there's a bit of purple CA visible. And also green CA, for what it's worth, on the bird's shoulder on the right-hand side. Cmao20 (talk) 23:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I like the way it looks like this crow has been working out, but the purple is from very real CA (see the green halos elsewhere) which needs to be fixed. Daniel Case (talk) 04:30, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 19:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tibet Nation (talk) 20:52, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Habitator terrae 🌍 15:13, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, pending a fix for the CA. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above and I'd expect here crispy sharpness and no areas overexposed Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:45, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose technical quality and composition. 10:32, 21 March 2020 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:04, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Site des Orgues 008.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2020 at 07:45:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#France#Pyrénées-Orientales
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 07:45, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 07:45, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose A good picture but not quite at FP level for me, it could be sharper in places, and the composition and light fall into the good-but-not-great category. Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good reception, but unfortunately with CA's. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Llez (talk) 16:29, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:View of Lodeve 03.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2020 at 11:26:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 11:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice view, but I'm not wild about that crop; seems roomy at the top and ends abruptly at the bottom. Also, the light is a bit flat.--Peulle (talk) 14:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose not an exceptional shot. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:49, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Valuable document but poor light -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:45, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile, a useful photo but seems all a bit washed-out and nothing exceptional in terms of composition. Cmao20 (talk) 15:17, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Langweerderwielen-Langwarder Wielen. Harde wind, regen, hagel en natte sneeuw op 22-02-2020. (d.j.b) 20.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 16:20:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Netherlands
Info Langweerderwielen-Langwarder Wielen. Shore reed breaks the waves. Black and white photos are not very popular in this place. But I risk it.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 16:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm not seeing a big wow factor here, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 19:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Yeah. Nice reeds, but not an exceptional composition, regardless of whether it's black & white or color. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I enjoy this. Black and white was the right choice here, it makes it almost an abstract shot of shapes and lines. Cmao20 (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I get a slight déjà vu from this FP; a compo I think is a bit better suited for monochrome. --Cart (talk) 22:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I personally have a thing for BW shots, but this one doesn't shine among the others to promote, sorry. --T.Bednarz (talk) 01:05, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 18:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 04:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the comment.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:36, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ornamientiertes Altarkreuz von Hermann Jünger 20200203 RAW.png

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2020 at 06:58:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info An ornamented cross in a church in Hof (Saale). Cross created by Hermann Jünger, photograph created/uploaded/nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 06:58, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 06:58, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Herrliches Kunstwerk, hervorragend fotografiert. -- Spurzem (talk) 11:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:12, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support But: A photograph shouldn't be uploaded in PNG format. And please no red links at the categories, create the category or remove the link. And user categories should be hidden, please have a look to {{User category}}. --XRay ^talk 09:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC) Thank you for the hints, corrected --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:18, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. PNG is a graphic format, it's not suitable for photos. Solution could be to provide a JPG alternative to this nomination. Otherwise it's good, I'd be happy to support if JPG. --Podzemnik (talk) 09:58, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~:: Info Sorry, I can't transfer the OTRS permission to another file (type), sorry --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:05, 16 March 2020 (UTC)~~ [reply]

Question @Podzemnik: What makes JPEG better here? --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:21, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Podzemnik: JPG file added, thanks for the hint --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The background distracts from the subject. Daniel Case (talk) 15:04, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel. If the background were symmetrical, I'd react differently. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info @PantheraLeo1359531:
- Upload der JPEG without OTRS-Template and credit the conversion and the original photo,
- because JPEGs are rendered more sharp by Wikimedia.
Habitator terrae 🌍 15:09, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, I'll try it --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I added a new version, I hope, the credits are alright --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative JPG-File

Info JPG version of the PNG file --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 15:50, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per my remarks above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:56, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks. The picture is working me. --Podzemnik (talk) 22:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan Kekek. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The JPG version is good! --Wikiolo (talk) 10:42, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:40, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wandeling over het Hulshorsterzand-Hulshorsterheide 07-03-2020. (d.j.b) 21.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2020 at 10:15:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Netherlands
Info created by Famberhorst - uploaded by Famberhorst - nominated by Junior Jumper -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 10:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 10:15, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Spurzem (talk) 11:44, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Seven Pandas (talk) 11:49, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. That's beautiful. I love the reflections, and the whole composition works. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:40, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:12, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:10, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 09:54, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:31, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice, the kind of view that seems ordinary but has made an excellent photo. Cmao20 (talk) 23:20, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:23, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but what is so special with this photo? excellent, yes this could be, but featured??? Habitator terrae 🌍 22:03, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. -- Karelj (talk) 12:25, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you for nominating my photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 18:39, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Habitator. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:49, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --Ivar (talk) 11:10, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --Ermell (talk) 14:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too ordinary -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:11, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:41, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Daniel Souček U21 Czech Republic vs Greece 10-10-2019.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2020 at 16:28:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Association football (soccer)
Info created by T.Bednarz - uploaded by T.Bednarz - nominated by T.Bednarz -- T.Bednarz (talk) 16:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- T.Bednarz (talk) 16:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 17:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love his concentration and the rain, almost gladiatorial. Also hard to get such a relatively clean background during a game. --Cart (talk) 19:46, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The rain is what makes this image quite amazing, each droplet adding contrast to the player and blurred background. CookieMonster755 (talk) 23:42, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:44, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 10:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 21:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:26, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 08:49, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 18:38, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Association football (soccer)

File:Kapuzinerkresse Blätter Tropfen-20200308-RM-001327.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Mar 2020 at 07:39:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Tropaeolaceae
Info Nasturtium leaves with water drops. Stacked with Zerene Stacker from 18 frames. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 07:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 07:39, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:48, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 08:59, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:45, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 11:31, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:01, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Reluctantly, as I love the images in the two water droplets on the right, but the droplet in the middle moved during your shots. On my software I could select this part from just one image. Charles (talk) 19:41, 14 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

might be worth notifying previous voters Ermell who may have missed the central water droplet. Charles (talk) 16:02, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for your expert analysis Charles but you can see from the reflection that nothing has moved. I also think that this apparent wave movement fits well to the character of the picture. Everyone sees a picture with different eyes and can form an opinion about it.--Ermell (talk) 18:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:11, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 10:35, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:19, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:24, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:17, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:57, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit ordanary symbolism (green - color of hope - with water, but still you get the rigt moment for an featured picture. Habitator terrae 🌍 15:06, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:39, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 19:27, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family : Tropaeolaceae

File:Dusky Moorehen.png, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2020 at 03:00:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the gallery here>]]
Uploaded by tdrsam - nominated by tdrsam

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Way too small. The absolute minimum size for a featured picture or quality image is 2 megapixels. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Btv1b10572088s phare de Cordouan retouche.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 16:54:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Exteriors#Monuments
Info created by Charles Mercereau - uploaded by S. DÉNIEL - nominated by S. DÉNIEL
Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 16:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Looks very good to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice drawing. Cmao20 (talk) 19:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:15, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:29, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:04, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dramatic drawing, good scan. --Aristeas (talk) 15:52, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:32, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:16, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:29, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Exteriors#Monuments

File:Carcassonne Cite.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 20:20:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#France
Info All by Benh (talk) 20:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I forgot to renominate that one after the previous attempt failed (and after the fix, obviously)... 10 years ago! I think it's still OK by today standards. -- Benh (talk) 20:20, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Habitator terrae 🌍 20:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I agree. This holds up well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support How honest of you to oppose the original nomination, Benh! If you hadn't, it would have been featured. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 21:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Indeed, still a solid FP candidate. Cmao20 (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A heron in the river is just a bonus. --Podzemnik (talk) 21:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment To me the castle walls and slope up to it, look a little washed out compared to the rest of the photo. It doesn't quite match in contrast/blacks/detail/sort of. Care to take a look? Otherwise fine. --Cart (talk) 22:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed (somehow). I did a fix by pushing the "texture" slider in Lr (selectively on the castle). Hope other reviewers don't mind... It's very subtle, but maybe it satisfies you. - Benh (talk) 22:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Haha! Are you suggesting I'm hard to please? :-D Rightly so, but I like excellent balance and quality (if possible) in such a splendid picture. --Cart (talk) 23:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I really didn't mean that :) Just that the change was so subtle (I didn't want to risk ruining it, and let down other voters) that maybe you would find it's not enough to ur tastes, or wouldn't notice it. I actually agree with you, but the castle and bridge have so uneven lighting here that I struggle a bit to find something good. And lucky I still had the tiff at home on such an old pic! - Benh (talk) 23:23, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Wonderful view -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:56, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Still on my to-visit list. Charles (talk) 09:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 09:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. --Aristeas (talk) 14:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 05:42, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 00:10, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 14:11, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:09, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#France

File:Englische Rose The Reeve Raureif-20191205-RM-091334.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 13:36:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Rosaceae
Info Bud of an English rose of the variety "The Reeve" with hoarfrost in a garden in Bamberg. Focus stack of 12 pictures. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 13:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 13:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:47, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool! --Cart (talk) 14:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It is very cool, though I'd have liked (as usual) for the flower to be vertical, but it wouldn't work for the webs. Possibly reduce ice highlights a bit? Charles (talk) 15:00, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are very careful to photograph animals in their natural environment and positions, why are you against photographing plants the way they grow? --Cart (talk) 15:17, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well roses do grow straight. When I take, say, insect macro shots, my camera is seldom on the horizontal, so I do frequently rotate except where would mean that the image misrepresented real life. Like this silly one I did years ago. And this is an artistic shot, not a botanical one. Charles (talk) 16:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not all roses grow straight and in this case the vertical 'stripes' in the background would be off if the photo was rotated. I like that we can have diversity wrt flower orientation. --Cart (talk) 16:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I actually said it wouldn't work with this image. Charles (talk) 18:33, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:27, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Typical Ermell focus-stack excellence. Cmao20 (talk) 21:11, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao20. --Podzemnik (talk) 22:01, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 22:08, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:00, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 09:52, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:21, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:40, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:34, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 15:46, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:12, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Rosaceae

File:Illuminated facade of a 3-storey restaurant with Japanese signs and red paper lanterns, Chiyoda, Tokyo.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 20:03:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Japan
Info created by Basile Morin - uploaded by Basile Morin - nominated by Till.niermann -- Till (talk) 20:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Till (talk) 20:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Could someone please correct the gallery name, I don't know which would be the right one in this case. --Till (talk) 20:09, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed... but someone might disagree with my choice. - Benh (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support What a beautiful take of the subject... Wish I had come up with the idea myself when I was there. - Benh (talk) 20:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:14, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Pretty good but Basile can you fix the bottom? The tiles are kind of funny there, possibly caused by content filling. GPS location would be appreciated too. --Podzemnik (talk) 21:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done This was due to perspective correction. GPS added. Thanks, Podzemnik -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank you very much, Till.niermann -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 23:13, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a "wedding cake"! --Cart (talk) 23:53, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:17, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 09:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I had the same association as Cart: looks like a wedding cake with candles ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 14:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:37, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:24, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:47, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:29, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:31, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:10, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Japan

File:Saint-Jean-Baptiste Reredos.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 14:40:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#France
Info all by Benh (talk) 14:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Because of the high resolution, and because I spent time finding the corrects names of each statue so that the high res is not in vain. -- Benh (talk) 14:40, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support If you look up the phrase "All in" in the Encyclopedia of French Churches, this will be the main picture for that article. --Cart (talk) 14:57, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It was worth the time and effort. Charles (talk) 14:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support yes, of course! --Palauenc05 (talk) 15:30, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:26, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Great photo and superb labeling! How many photos is this stitched from? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:37, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I threw the sources away long ago, but I believe it was about 25, very likely taken with a Fuji X-T2 + 35mm f/1.4 mounted on. - Benh (talk) 19:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Peulle (talk) 19:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support Decently sharp even at immense full size. A very beautiful place and even more impressive with the interesting and useful annotations. Cmao20 (talk) 21:12, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 09:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:13, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:57, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:47, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:29, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:11, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#France

Rosy-faced lovebird, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 20:43:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Rosy-faced lovebird (Agapornis roseicollis roseicollis), Erongo, Namibia
Rosy-faced lovebird (Agapornis roseicollis roseicollis), Erongo, Namibia

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Order : Psittaciformes (Parrots)
Info I initially found the second of these images when browsing QIs of birds, and was impressed by the sharpness and detail on a colourful and beautiful bird. I was going to nominate that one by itself, but on ENWiki there is currently an FP set nom with the justification that these pictures together show both the front details and the complete back of the bird. This seems sensible to me, so I present the set nom here. Created by Charlesjsharp - uploaded by Charlesjsharp - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:43, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support, good nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support very good.--Ermell (talk) 22:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Photographing such over-the-top cute subjects is almost cheating! :-) --Cart (talk) 22:24, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:19, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you for the nomination. Charles (talk) 09:24, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 09:45, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:43, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:35, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 20:51, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:32, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:31, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 13:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 15:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:30, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. ///Eatcha (talk) 13:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Order : Psittaciformes (Parrots)

File:Fior di Prugno (bis).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2020 at 17:34:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the gallery here>]]
Info created by USERNAME - uploaded by USERNAME - nominated by PROPOLI87 -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 17:34, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 17:34, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please stop adding a duplicate of your photo on your nominations. I have removed it yet again. --Cart (talk) 17:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know why every time I'm wrong. Thanks for your patience.PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:31, 23 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 08:31, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Background, crop. Charles (talk) 18:15, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Sharpness may be good enough for QI, but it's just OK at best, the crops are too close on 3 sides. Also, why do you have this created and uploaded by "USERNAME"? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:28, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Every time I make a mistake in the loading procedure and I apologize for this. Thanks for the objective judgment. At this point I take the photo and go to photograph the plum blossoms again. In Italy we are all locked in the house because of the Coronavirus quarantine, but the plum is in my garden at home and it will be a pleasure.PROPOLI87 (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Delist PROPOLI87 (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 07:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: Invalid nomination. --A.Savin 13:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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:Hortus Haren 18-05-2019. (actm.) 03.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2020 at 18:22:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family : Fomitopsidaceae
Info Location: Hortus Haren. (Laetiporus sulphureus) on ( Ginkgo biloba ). The fruiting bodies of the Laetiporus sulphureus can weigh up to 10 kilograms.
All by me -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:27, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:35, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:16, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Seven Pandas (talk) 23:18, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:34, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 18:56, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice picture, but it seems too yellowish for me. Is it natural? Tournasol7 (talk) 11:30, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Answer: the color matches well. The light was very bright. And you can tell from the bark that the colors are natural.--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 18:35, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Fungi#Family : Fomitopsidaceae

File:Mirador del Velo de Novia, Seixal, Madeira, Portugal, 2019-05-30, DD 67.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2020 at 18:49:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Portugal
Info Véu da Noiva Waterfall, Seixal, Madeira, Portugal. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 18:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very nice. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful place and super-high resolution. I'd like to see what it looks like in good weather, but this is equally good. Cmao20 (talk) 19:31, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done in difficult in conditions --Michielverbeek (talk) 22:13, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was there just a few days ago and I know how difficult the light conditions are --Llez (talk) 06:35, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:08, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:28, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

* Support Well done in challenging terrain. Augend (talk) 03:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." You have not enough time or edits. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. :-) --Cart (talk) 09:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:06, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Portugal

File:University of Washington During the Evening.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 03:19:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info created by Augend - uploaded by Augend - nominated by Augend -- Augend (talk) 03:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Augend (talk) 03:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: this is an absolutely tiny picture. The absolute minimum size for featured picture or quality image is 2 megapixels. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:55, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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:Dendrocygna eytoni - Macquarie University.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Mar 2020 at 23:33:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Dendrocygna
Info I don't normally put up two shots by the same author at once, but I haven't had time to look for potential candidates; this, however, has long been one I've had my eye on. Superb quality and background. created by JJ Harrison - uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 23:33, 15 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Too bad the grasses in the lower right block the bird's right foot, but that's my only complaint. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:31, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:19, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 09:16, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:02, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:52, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 18:06, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The foot cut off by the grass. Charles (talk) 19:04, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support exactly because of this. But this is a matter of taste... Habitator terrae 🌍 22:00, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:53, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:30, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:49, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 12:32, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:36, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zcebeci (talk) 19:24, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support But I think it could be cropped in the sides more. Daniel Case (talk) 19:14, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:41, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:09, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 07:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Dendrocygna

File:Carex secta on Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2020 at 06:50:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)
Info All by me. It's carex secta growing on the western sides of Lake Clearwater, Canterbury, New Zealand. I like the environment, it's quite unusual. -- Podzemnik (talk) 06:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 06:50, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Good form, and of course very high quality. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:19, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I love the scenery, but I'm a little unsure about this nom. Given the description, the Carex secta is supposed to be the main subject? But I'm not convinced by the sharpness level on that. --Peulle (talk) 09:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Peulle: You'll be right that the name of the file could be different. I named it like that because there was a sign saying that it's an area dominated by the plant Carex secta. If the sign wasn't there, I'd name it like 'Western side of Lake Clearwater with surrounding mountains'. I'll rename it to that once the nomination is over. --Podzemnik (talk) 18:48, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ivar (talk) 09:31, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not a fan of hard midday lighting, but nice sight - Benh (talk) 10:22, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 11:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Gnosis (talk) 17:46, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Charles (talk) 19:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:34, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:56, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:37, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:31, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 15:11, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:22, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 18:55, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:03, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very wild -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:24, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:25, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support That first-day-of-spring feeling ... very timely in this hemisphere. Daniel Case (talk) 20:51, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:46, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 06:05, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 05:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 26 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)

File:Cass Saddle, Craigieburn Forest Park, New Zealand.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2020 at 06:25:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)
Info All by me. It's a view of Black Range, Canterbury, New Zealand. -- Podzemnik (talk) 06:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 06:25, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 09:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:12, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 11:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 19:07, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quality is great as usual, but I do have concerns that there are 40+ FPs of Waitaha. This may be too many. Charles (talk) 22:47, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

We also have 87 FPs of the Alps in Trentino-South Tyrol, many of them of the same alps, a place with an area of about 1/3 of Waitaha. 50 FPs of alps in Vorarlberg, area 5,8% of Waitaha.

And then there are 103 FPs from a tiny insignificant place called Lysekil Municipality. No complaints there yet. --Cart (talk) 21:44, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the 87 FPs is far too many. There is much duplication and they cannot all be some of the finest on Commons. Surely, they devalue the FP award. If you published a book on Trentino, you wouldn't even include them all! Cart's comment about Lysekil misses the point completely. Charles (talk) 22:54, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

My point (albeit in a cheeky comment) was that if you have an active photographer somewhere, that place will be over-represented, in line with what Podzemnik says below. --Cart (talk) 23:02, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp: I wish we had more diversification at FP: geographical (there are around 31 countries without a single FP), creator (eg. Poco a Poco has created around 5 % of our FPs), topic (I think we don't have enough portraits / street photography / food photos etc. compared to eg. landscapes) and so on. The project is fully dependent on its users and it'll always be biased. We can only do our best in supporting minority groups and people from underprivileged communities to join us. --Podzemnik (talk) 22:28, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --A.Savin 23:01, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 23:17, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good panorama. I get Charles' point but it's a reflection of the fact that we have only a couple dozen highly active nominators and obviously they produce lots of content from the places near where they live. Of course we should be really happy to encourage new contributors and produce a more diverse selection of FPs, but Podzemnik should still keep these coming! Cmao20 (talk) 23:33, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

and I guess I'll keep voting for them! Charles (talk) 08:49, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:56, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:36, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 13:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:22, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 18:55, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:05, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:23, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:42, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 06:05, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 05:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/New_Zealand#Canterbury_(Waitaha)

File:Church of Our Lady of Consolation in Guimaraes (3).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2020 at 09:10:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Portugal
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 09:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 09:10, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like that light - sorry.--Peulle (talk) 10:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:54, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I agree with Basile, but I'd feel happier if the spires were sharper. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:26, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Basile Morin. Habitator terrae 🌍 11:29, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Something off about it, but somehow that's what makes it work. Daniel Case (talk) 02:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Very well done, just the light is rather unfortunate. --Aristeas (talk) 17:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful church and well-captured despite some minor flaws. Cmao20 (talk) 20:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:32, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Portugal

File:Crimea, Ai-Petri, low clouds.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2020 at 07:27:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Crimea
Info created & uploaded Dmytro Balkhovitin - nominated by Ivar (talk) 07:27, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 07:27, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I have trouble believing in all that purple. Do you? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: Why does the sky sometimes turn purple? --Ivar (talk) 11:08, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Gorgeous sunrise. Not shocked by the colours at this time of the day, although it's probably emphasized a bit which is fine as editorial choice. - Benh (talk) 09:28, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I have no problem believing in the colors as such since I myself have photos pending editing that are way more purple in raw. But I'm not as forgiving as Benh about the rest of the processing. Too enthusiastic use of clarity and contrast plus raising the highlights on the rocks makes it look like some 90s fantasy painting, a style very common wrt Ukranian and Russian photos. I'm not fond of it though. Take a look at how nice it would look with a little dialing back some of the "usual suspects" clarity, blacks, highlights, contrast and dehaze. Color is not touched just slightly less vibrant. I would have no problem supporting a photo like that and it would probably look stunning with some proper from-raw editing. --Cart (talk) 12:40, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Breathtaking view. Excellent photographer Balkhovitin who won the 2nd place POTY 🥈 2013 with a nomination that doesn't look over-processed, the 1st prize Wiki Loves Earth Ukraine 2019 with this candidature, and the 2nd prize in 2017. I've just nominated 1, 2, 3 at QIC, there are more available. Here the light is special due to the golden hour, that naturally enhances the colors. Nice foreground, well balanced composition, and I find this sea of clouds impressive -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:45, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:51, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:40, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. I'm satisfied by the explanation of why the sky could look purple. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitely the benefit of the doubt. Great shot. Charles (talk) 09:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 12:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A bit oversharpened IMO, but OK --Llez (talk) 12:37, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:26, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support although I think Cart's edit would be fine, too. Daniel Case (talk) 19:20, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It does look a bit unnatural at first, but at full size I think it's OK. Cmao20 (talk) 20:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support My fingers feel cold from looking at the picture. --Podzemnik (talk) 22:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:59, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:41, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 05:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Minor halos at the rocks and IMO the image is leaning out. All in all it's acceptable. --XRay ^talk 06:06, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural#Crimea

File:Poecilimon ornatus SLO.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2020 at 12:39:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family : Tettigoniidae (Katydids or bush crickets (UK))
Info all by Yerpo --— Yerpo ^Eh? 12:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Unfortunately, the picture was taken long ago and I don't remember the exact location. It was only recently that I got incentive to make the effort and identify the species, then decided upload it to Commons too. Hopefully, a general location is good enough. — Yerpo ^Eh? 12:39, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 12:56, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, the instructions were unclear and it's been a while since I went through this process. — Yerpo ^Eh? 13:29, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Green insect on green background doesn't work for me. --Peulle (talk) 15:01, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment A lot of empty space all around. Not optimum composition in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

seems hard to crop tighter given the long antennas :) - Benh (talk) 08:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sometimes 15% make the difference -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:33, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose DOF problem in some areas, i.e., focus is not good on the rear lags.--Zcebeci (talk) 19:39, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:03, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Good composition but I think the DoF is a bit too shallow. Cmao20 (talk) 20:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:23, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Zcebeci. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:43, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Composition doesn't work for me -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:14, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 17:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:PistenBully 600 Polar Les-Diablerets 2020-03-08 13-28.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2020 at 18:47:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Other_land_vehicles
Info I always loved theses vehicles. This one is among the first models with a somewhat eco friendly engine ("Polar"). The scratched front shield shows the rugged design. The photo was taken during a break of the driver with the sun forming a blue-green-red canvas. Created, uploaded, nominated by me, Axel Tschentscher
Support -- Axel ^(talk) 18:47, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good focus to main object, but no wow for me --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:13, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow for me. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 17:18, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't like the little bit of a red vehicle on the lower left. I haven't decided whether I would support or oppose if that were cropped out - I like the composition but wish the background weren't quite so unsharp. However, I would oppose the photo in this version. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: That's part of a helmet peeking into the picture. I cropped it out now. Thanks for noticing. -- Axel ^(talk) 18:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Thank you. Big improvement, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support. The tractor is nice and sharp; the background may not be quite as sharp, but I like it – it complements the subject nicely. —Bruce1ee^talk 12:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The comment above says it all. Cmao20 (talk) 20:59, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 22:04, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michielverbeek --Milseburg (talk) 13:29, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 18:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 11:05, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above. -- Karelj (talk) 14:41, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Michielverbeek. --Fischer.H (talk) 09:40, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 13:59, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I guess this probably won't be promoted ... really too bad, this is the best thing I've seen on here in a while. —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral IMO it has wow, but the crop is too tight. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 08:54, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 05:47, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 6 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vista de Bergen desde la montaña Fløyen, Noruega, 2019-09-08, DD 27-31 PAN.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 Mar 2020 at 20:49:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Norway
Info Panoramic view of Bergen from Mount Fløyen, Norway. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 20:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:49, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment On the right the horizon is sloping very much--Ermell (talk) 21:30, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Abstain~~ for now. I really want to see this become featured because it's an incredible panorama but I do feel that Ermell is correct. I'd either like to see this fixed or to see it demonstrated that this isn't actually a real problem (as in, it looks tilted but isn't). Cmao20 (talk) 23:35, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment some parts are overexposed too, notes added. --Ivar (talk) 11:00, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Ermell, Cmao20, Ivar: I uploaded a new version with following fixes: stitching eror at sea level, curved horizon on the right, overexposure of the cruise ship and a bit also on the left (which is still partially there but to me acceptable) Poco a poco (talk) 14:50, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The whole left part is also not on par with the rightmost for the horizon (even after the fix). I've pointed out evidence with annotations. The whole left should be levelled with whole right. - Benh (talk) 14:58, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Benh, one more update Poco a poco (talk) 15:12, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You've gone a bit too low in the middle, but it's much better. - Benh (talk) 15:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Looks great now. An immense and very beautiful panorama. Cmao20 (talk) 16:30, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 18:23, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment There are also some stitching issues, see the notes on the bottom corners. It also looks like your software has made some parts a bit soft, possibly where 2 frames meet each other. It's barely visible but I wonder why. --Podzemnik (talk) 02:18, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Podzemnik: I couldn't see anything strange in those areas. There cannot be any stitching issues because those areas belong to only one frame. I was not aware of the other issue, could you add a note for that, too? Poco a poco (talk) 09:59, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Poco a poco There is some funny staff on the very left bottom where the first yellow grass is from the left (I put another note). The unsharp areas are caused by one of softer frames. It's not very visible but on pixel peep level so I wouldn't be bothered too much. by that --Podzemnik (talk) 10:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - This is a very good achievement, and I love the sheep on the left side! I saw what looked like 1 dust spot and tried to show the region it's in - have a look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:55, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Ikan Kekek: removed Poco a poco (talk) 19:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Has faults, yes, but on balance I like it a lot. Daniel Case (talk) 03:55, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Apart from the overexposed part at the left that I forgive, I can't spot most of the technical issues pointed with notes (especially not the stitching errors). Thus I assume they are very minor problems. High resolution, nice view -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:08, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks pretty good to me. Is that a balloon we see? Charles (talk) 09:23, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:28, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:33, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Left side not sharp enough for me for FP.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:53, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:26, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Norway

File:Novel Coronavirus SARS-CoV-2 (49666286236).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 Mar 2020 at 21:37:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Other lifeforms#Virus
Info created by NIAID - uploaded and nominated by Habitator terrae -- Habitator terrae 🌍 21:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality for this small scale, the colorization has much wow. -- Habitator terrae 🌍 21:37, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose It is as normal SEM photo, coloured, no details of the virus discernible --Llez (talk) 13:23, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
@Llez: Same would apply on the precedence File:Ebola Virus - Electron Micrograph.tiff. In the case viewable here in addition the apoptotic cell is very detailed. Habitator terrae 🌍 14:03, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow-y image, and pertinent to current events, too! —Percival Kestreltail (talk) 15:57, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not very sharp, and quite noisy, for this rather low resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:12, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
No better quality is possible in this scale. Taking a look at other example of such photographs enabling to see, this is one of the best on this scale. Habitator terrae 🌍 23:28, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
At least 4x bigger is possible. Plus the novelty is not what we're looking for in FPC. We had similar nominations during the Hong Khong protest, recently. For sure we'll have much more interesting documents about the virus in the future. Also please check your categories, there are currently red links -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
4x bigger is possible, but this isn't the same quality. The red link was also ununderstandable for me, but now solved. Novelty is no criteria, but this picture has so much wow (in my opinion), that I wasn't patience to wait the respectful time before nominating... Habitator terrae 🌍 11:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The picture you link above is just 1.5x bigger. But thanks for uploading 4X bigger images of this virus. As said above, it is possible -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:24, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for now. It's certainly interesting but it's not that high resolution and not superb quality. I think that when the Coronavirus crisis has passed in a few months' time we'll be able to look at it with enough distance and perspective to judge fairly what kind of image might represent it at FP, but right now I think there's a temptation to feature this just because it's an important current event, while the image quality probably isn't up to it. Cmao20 (talk) 21:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Or whenever the crisis is over... -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:58, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 11:05, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It has wow indeed, but it's noisy as Basile Morin said. --pandakekok9 05:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 06:35, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Wandeling over het Hulshorsterzand-Hulshorsterheide 07-03-2020. (d.j.b) 12.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 06:41:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Netherlands Provincie Gelderland.
Info Alternating biotope on a small surface in a rugged heather landscape.
All by me -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 06:41, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - I appreciate your love of nature, but I see nothing compelling in this photo, compositionally. Sorry about that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan Kekek. --Fischer.H (talk) 10:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same here.--Peulle (talk) 11:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I see what you were going for, this was a photo worth taking because it shows the beauty in a fairly nondescript landscape, and I like the colours. But I agree with the above that this is not an outstanding composition for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the comment. I had taken this into account. I probably see different (with wonder) to such photos than I should.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't say that, it was worth a try. It is a talent in itself to be able to see beauty in places other photographers might ignore. Take this image by you, if I were walking past that scene I wouldn't have thought to take a photo, but it is definitely a deserving FP. These kinds of photos are hit-and-miss but they are nice to see anyway. Cmao20 (talk) 17:37, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your response.--Famberhorst (talk) 18:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I don't want you to lose your sense of wonder at nature, either, and if that's what you're taking from my approach of judging photos mostly by their compositions, please don't. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:11, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That feeling for nature is getting stronger. Especially because it is coming under increasing pressure, partly due to our actions.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Rua do Clube Fluvial Portuense 7 in Porto.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 13:19:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Portugal
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 13:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 13:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lack of sharpness and unfortunate top cut --Wilfredor (talk) 13:35, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice idea and a worthwhile shot but I agree with Wilfredor that you've presented sharper material here. Cmao20 (talk) 18:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 20:47, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Amber Mountain chameleon (Calumma amber) male Montagne d’Ambre 2.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2020 at 15:33:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Chamaeleonidae (Chameleons)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 15:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charles (talk) 15:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice!, although I'm torn between the spider web being a distraction or a feature... - Benh (talk) 15:55, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent, one of your sharpest photos. Cmao20 (talk) 16:33, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:08, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. --Fischer.H (talk) 18:18, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 20:00, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 02:05, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Really beautiful animal and fine composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:21, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 09:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 14:03, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 15:59, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Meiræ 16:23, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:21, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent --Wilfredor (talk) 23:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:36, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:37, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 05:16, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Some mention spider web, but it look like "hair from the tourists" ? So what is it. Should be erased.--Mile (talk) 13:06, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Must be a hair. Thanks. Now removed Mile. Charles (talk) 13:50, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Look, it was fast. Would say its good quality, look like "not Canon". --Mile (talk) 14:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family : Chamaeleonidae (Chameleons)

File:Dendrobates tinctorius - Karlsruhe Zoo 05.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2020 at 13:47:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Amphibians#Ordo_:_Anura#Family_:_Dendrobatidae#Genus_:_Dendrobates
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 13:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 13:47, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zcebeci (talk) 19:38, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 09:51, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too busy background, lower POV would be better. There is also more space behind the frog than in front of it. —kallerna (talk) 12:42, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Background is maybe a bit busy but still very impressive and sharp photo. Cmao20 (talk) 21:05, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral HQ, interesting subject but per above Poco a poco (talk) 18:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 11:06, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 20:18, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Amphibians#Ordo_:_Anura#Family_:_Dendrobatidae#Genus_:_Dendrobates

File:Dülmen, Kirchspiel, Börnste, Felder und Bäume -- 2017 -- 3238.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2020 at 19:15:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#North Rhine-Westphalia
Info created by XRay – uploaded by XRay – nominated by Draceane — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 19:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 19:28, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 02:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality and nice atmosphere Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment cropped birds could go? Charles (talk) 21:51, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Per Charles, would be good too clone out the croppe birds at the borders Poco a poco (talk) 18:33, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
It will be done - tomorrow. Thank you for your suggestion. --XRay ^talk 18:55, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Done It's done. The cropped birds and one blurry bird are cloned out. --XRay ^talk 05:32, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Grtek (talk) 00:53, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:05, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Thank you to Draceane for nominating my photograph. I like it, but sometimes I'm not sure about nominating. --XRay ^talk 11:09, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice crepuscular mood. Daniel Case (talk) 21:17, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:46, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support, now that the cropped birds are gone --pandakekok9 07:34, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 21:00, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Germany#North Rhine-Westphalia

File:Preparing and slicing carrots.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2020 at 18:51:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits and raw vegetables
Info All by me, -- Cart (talk) 18:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 18:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I don't know how to put it, but it misses something to me... I wouldn't feature it on a cook book. Not sure if it's the too "random" setup. The framing is a bit tight with the cut shadow on the left. - Benh (talk) 19:13, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This is the setup that I use when I do this. I like to have it in normal "working order". I was actually fixing the carrots when I thought of taking a shot of it. So I just put down the knife, washed my hands and fetched my camera. I was sure someone would object to the crop if I did it, or to too much space if I didn't. So first I uploaded a wider version. Feel free to revert to it if you find it better. With food photos on FPC, you are "damned if you do and damned if you don't". :) For any food media from this century, this would be the preferred crop. However, I have seen how modern food photos are treated here. --Cart (talk) 19:17, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oh well, I've reverted it. I guess someone will ask me to crop it now. ;) --Cart (talk) 19:39, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support maybe would prefer a surface with different contrast, but this works for me. wonder if the photographer has a preferred method of cooking... — Rhododendrites ^talk | 04:20, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was considering moving it all from my work table to some other surface, but decided I liked the tone-in-tone warmth of comforting colors. Part of the batch became an extra layer in a lasagne (I try to make it healthier). The frozen bits will be used in smaller portions together with other vegetables with stir-fried noodles, garlic and chicken. I'm not a fancy cook. --Cart (talk) 04:54, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Question - I like the composition and will probably vote to support, but I feel like I'd like a little more room on the bottom. I guess that's not possible? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:18, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible, I left a good space around it all to allow for different crops, not sure it's a good idea though. It would create a lot of empty space just to get a little extra room for the stand. Let's hear what others have to say. --Cart (talk) 11:45, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Basotxerri (talk) 14:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better-composed than most shots I've seen of this kind. Cmao20 (talk) 18:35, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:06, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:32, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:15, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 02:39, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very good of its type, sharp and a good composition, so I'll give a little and support in spite of not being able to get the bottom crop I want. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:57, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 06:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ik hou niet van worteltjes, maar wel van deze foto.--Famberhorst (talk) 06:47, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just to say... I prefer the square crop. It's like prose where the author has trimmed anything unnecessary. The larger crop has the shadow of the blow and chopping board. That said, as a repository rather than a publisher, the larger crop allows options that a tight one eliminates. -- Colin (talk) 20:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Fruits and raw vegetables

File:Silek Lanyah 2020 - Two men performing martial art in a stream.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2020 at 17:10:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info created by Dody Guci - uploaded by Dody Guci - nominated by Mimihitam -- Mimihitam (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mimihitam (talk) 17:10, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 18:14, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 18:57, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cbrescia (talk) 22:44, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:51, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 02:04, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although I would have preferred more sharpness on the main subject, my opinion is we can't blame the settings. The wow factor is here, the originality too. Interesting action -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:00, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I love it! Bagus sangat! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:19, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 09:26, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 14:08, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:34, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:01, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support incredible...--Grtek (talk) 00:56, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:39, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:38, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 05:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 06:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:48, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:23, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports#Individual sports

File:Thanlwin Bridge 1.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 Mar 2020 at 19:27:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Myanmar
Info The Bridge on the River ~~Kwai~~Salween. Created, uploaded & nominated by Kallerna —kallerna (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support —kallerna (talk) 19:27, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Seven Pandas (talk) 23:11, 17 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The plume of reed to the left before the bridge is a pity. But I think it is a successful photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment @Famberhorst: I like the reeds. It gives the photo depth. Seven Pandas (talk) 21:07, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I'm fine with the reed. I only regret the plume of reed in front of the bridge. But that is secondary. I think it is a balanced photo.--Famberhorst (talk) 07:10, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support I prefer this to the alt because the reeds add something to the composition. Cmao20 (talk) 21:06, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao20.--MZaplotnik^(talk) 09:52, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - This composition doesn't work for me. The other one does, but I don't think it's an alternate, per Cart. The other one is very clean, though I might want a little more on top. I'd recommend for you to nominate it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:58, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Alt

Support This one is better. --Claus 05:55, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is not a cropped or edited version of the original nomination. It's a different photo and should be in a new nom. --Cart (talk) 11:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain per Cart. Daniel Case (talk) 21:28, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - If this is nominated separately, I would seriously consider supporting it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:24, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Too bad this won't be featured because of technicalities... --pandakekok9 05:47, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - Au contraire; if it were nominated separately, it might pass. No way to know unless it is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cart (talk) 21:24, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Syzygium moorei flowering.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2020 at 07:14:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Myrtaceae
Info created by Poyt448 - uploaded by Poyt448 - nominated by HunterRSC -- HunterRSC (talk) 07:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- HunterRSC (talk) 07:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 09:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: it is a tiny picture, way smaller than the required absolute minimum of 2 megapixels. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:31, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

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.

thanks for looking at this picture, it was taken in 2006 with a cheap camera - uploaded larger imagePoyt448 (talk) 02:04, 4 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Playa de Baquio, País Vasco, España, 2019-08-13, DD 25-34 PAN.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 08:20:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Spain#Basque Country
Info View of the beach of , Basque Country, Spain. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 08:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 08:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice place, but midday harsh light conditions and some blurry frames are no-go for me (horizon is also s-curved). --Ivar (talk) 09:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 11:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Big picture with nothing shap at wrong time. --Mile (talk) 16:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The stitching could be a bit better at the right-hand side and I agree with Ivar that the horizon seems to curve a little. But ultimately I think people are being too picky over a 140mpx panorama. Downsize to half size and everything is basically sharp. Cmao20 (talk) 18:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Yes, Ivar is right, one frame is blurry, that's why I'll withdraw this nom for now and see what I can do about it (work for the weekend). On the other hand, Mile' comment "nothing shap (sic)" is just an false and insulting. Poco a poco (talk) 19:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 19:16, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gran autere dlieja San Durich a Urtijëi.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2020 at 09:55:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Italy
Info All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:55, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 09:55, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:45, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:32, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:51, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great resolution Poco a poco (talk) 18:39, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:19, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This needs a little perspective fix. It leans to the left. - Benh (talk) 06:51, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done Thanks @Benh: --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:22, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:10, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 08:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support after the adjustment. Charles (talk) 09:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:04, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent, very high-resolution photo. Cmao20 (talk) 15:16, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:20, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

* Support Good work on the resolution! Augend (talk) 03:15, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." You have not enough time or edits. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. :-) --Cart (talk) 09:36, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:45, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 18:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:44, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:03, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Italy

File:Trimeresurus vogeli, Vogel's pit viper - Khao Soi Dao Wildlife Sanctuary (46361404605).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 31 Mar 2020 at 06:09:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Viperidae_(Vipers)
Info created by Rushenb - uploaded by Dianakc - nominated by Ivar (talk) 06:09, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 06:09, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Kind of deja vu, but this is a different species with a differently colored eye, and the composition is different. And this is undeniably a great closeup of this viper's head. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:10, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan Kekek. --Cayambe (talk) 07:36, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 11:33, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:52, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:40, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:20, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The sharpness and the resolution are quite impressive. --Podzemnik (talk) 07:03, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:48, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:07, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 08:57, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:03, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support A big wow, even though we already have something similar - Benh (talk) 20:25, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --pandakekok9 05:06, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:20, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Andrei (talk) 09:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:45, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:02, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family_:_Viperidae_(Vipers)

File:Wide shot to Mefjordvær in evening, Senja, Troms, Norway, 2015 September.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 Mar 2020 at 09:49:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Norway#Northern Norway (Nord-Norge/Nord-Noreg)
Info created & uploaded by Ximonic - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dark, but still good sharpness. Nice mood shoot. :) --Peulle (talk) 10:39, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support outstanding! --Ivar (talk) 11:36, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow! They should film vampire movies there. --Cart (talk) 11:38, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice mood, yes - Benh (talk) 12:46, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Partially very nice, but too much of the panorama is uninteresting and dark. Highly downsampled, otherwise would suggest a crop. —kallerna (talk) 12:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:50, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Effective. Charles (talk) 15:02, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 15:31, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Zcebeci (talk) 17:54, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks too dark in the preview, but much better at full size. --Aristeas (talk) 17:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:41, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Habitator terrae 🌍 20:48, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's probably downsampled, but it's an excellent panorama anyway. Cmao20 (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Axel ^(talk) 09:54, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lights in the village are nice, but the vast majority is far too dark for an outstanding landscape panorama. --Milseburg (talk) 13:34, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 13:58, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support The darkness accentuates the forbidding nature of the landscape. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support I considered opposing, but after seeing it full size I changed my mind. The darkness actually fits well in the image. --pandakekok9 05:46, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:46, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /pandakekok9 13:27, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Norway#Northern Norway (Nord-Norge/Nord-Noreg)

File:Goémonier de Plouguerneau 30-08-2015-145.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 13:01:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created - uploaded - nominated by S. DÉNIEL
Support -- S. DÉNIEL (talk) 13:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but this composition is not sufficient for FP, imo. The guy on the left is partly obscured by the horse, and the one on the right has a broom handle in front of his face.--Peulle (talk) 13:12, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not reason for FP nomination. --Fischer.H (talk) 15:34, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle. Nice photo though. --Cayambe (talk) 17:04, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:02, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral It's a pity: taking the photo seconds before or after could have resulted in a FP. I agree with Peulle and Cayambe. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 11:30, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Peulle Daniel Case (talk) 02:12, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 15:36, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sailboat heading home in the evening.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2020 at 15:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport#Sailboats
Info All by me, -- Cart (talk) 15:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cart (talk) 15:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Serene mood. Cmao20 (talk) 19:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral don't call me picky, but the wind turbine is really a deal breaker here. And only my two cents, but NR might be a bit too strong. Far rocks can't look this "plain". - Benh (talk) 20:12, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Don't blame the NR, blame the small sensor. My camera simply can't do details of rocks that far off, but they are not the subject here and shouldn't matter that much. For me the wind turbine is what makes the image (boat, turbine and bird are all connected to wind). --Cart (talk) 20:26, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No the size doesn't matter here. And it's not good to spread such word in my opinion (especially in a world where we often repeat things without checking). It's how much light gets through the lens and its quality which counts. I checked, and I your NR settings are high (much higher than what I used for sure). And I may add that you probably don't need to stop down to 5.6 on such a small sensor camera to get enough DOF. That would help you collect more light. So if ur camera does ISO50, I suggest u use that, and use a wider aperture. - Benh (talk) 21:35, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll write a page to explain the equivalence. Just did some quick tests, and I might have insightful results to share. - Benh (talk) 22:26, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, I'll shut up about the sensor. And thank you for all your expert advice, I'm so glad to have you here to tell me everything I do wrong when I take photos. --Cart (talk) 22:29, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I hope it will be more clear :) the equivalence between different formats of cameras, I believe I know a bit on that. The rest, not so sure... - Benh (talk) 22:34, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was being sarcastic. A few friendly tips now and then, like most users at FPC do, are usually appreciated. These constant besserwisser lectures can however be rather tiresome and counter-productive. --Cart (talk) 22:50, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I see. I'll write it still (I have started). I take advice, and I can give some. I know when I'm right, and it'll clear misconceptions hopefully. This cannot be explained a in few words, so yes, can seem like a lecture. - Benh (talk) 23:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here you go. Far from complete (there's ISO to take in account), but you should already have an idea. And you needn't be sarcastic. I'm not the one who started it. I just made observation on the picture (as in assessment), and your justification was not correct after all. - Benh (talk) 00:04, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support very pleasing — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:06, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:59, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I feel the composition is too right-heavy. The sailboat is already slightly to the right, and the wind turbine just accentuates the imbalance. Having the boat a tiny bit more to the right and the wind turbine at the far left would make for a much better scene. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much happening in the photo if it is supposed to be a calm scene. Agree about the wind turbine. —kallerna (talk) 07:38, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Cart (talk) 11:00, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The Azulejos of the fish market of Funchal, Madeira

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Apr 2020 at 16:09:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Architectural elements#Other architectural elements
Info The two Azulejos with fish sellers at the wall of the fish market of Funchal, Madeira. Damaged original tiles have been replaced by brighter ones; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 16:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 16:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Not sure why you pair the left one with the restored one? Charles (talk) 16:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Info These two belong together as a set, they are situated at the left and the right side of the wall. --Llez (talk) 16:57, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment If it weren't for the reflections on some tiles, it would be a no brainer support... - Benh (talk) 16:31, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Info The tiles are very glossy and you have always reflections of the light from the windows. In contrast to many Azulejos these two are in the fish hall, not at the outer wall, so that the light conditions are somewhat difficult. --Llez (talk) 17:01, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
  - I see... again, a shame. You probably don't need these advices, but maybe taken from a slanted angle + using a polarizer might have gotten rid of the reflections? - Benh (talk) 17:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    - Info To get an impression of the light conditions and the location of the Azulejos, please have a look at this picture (where you can see both Azulejos at the wall at the right) and this one (the other is left of the stairs). --Llez (talk) 17:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - The one on the right seems somewhat blurry on its left side. I regret that that makes this set not FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:32, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- I withdraw my nomination --Llez (talk) 15:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vista de Funchal desde Pico dos Barcelos, Madeira, Portugal, 2019-05-29, DD 37-44 PAN.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2020 at 19:14:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Portugal
Info Panoramic view of Funchal from Pico dos Barcelos, Madeira, Portugal. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:14, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Pretty panorama but I'm sure the horizon can't be straight, it looks like it's leaning downwards to the right. Cmao20 (talk) 19:52, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Cmao20 I thought the same but I think you are misled by the clouds. I'm fairly sure the stitching is correct. I've highlighted the horizon. - Benh (talk) 20:07, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I also looked into it closely before the nom and came to the conclusion that the horizon is fine, but indeed the cloud can mislead Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Striked oppose per above. Still not sure this is FP but I will think about it some more. Cmao20 (talk) 23:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I see a vertical white line around the middle of the picture, extending down quite a ways from the top, and there's a dust spot to the right of it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:53, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

+1 completely forgot to mention when answering the above. - Benh (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose High resolution panorama, but lack of wow for me, sorry. Imho it's also too bright, a lot of white buildings are overexposed. --Ivar (talk) 06:31, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. --Grtek (talk) 10:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ivar. --Fischer.H (talk) 16:34, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 17:01, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 17:05, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sunset reflection.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 10:51:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Israel
Info created by טל שמע - uploaded by טל שמע (Tal Shema) - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 10:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 10:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a photo... The timing, the framing, the wide angle creating the dramatic perspective. And in general, what a photographer. - Benh (talk) 11:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Hmmm, not sure yet how I feel about this, for lack of a better word, 'fabricated' photo. A lot of post processing to make it dramatic and the long exposure makes the water/cliff interaction look like icing on a cake. At first I thought it was from that salty place in the Dead Sea! --Cart (talk) 11:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It is slightly tilted and (it may be intentional) the rocks are all blurred. Charles (talk) 13:58, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The blurred rocks are yielded by the water "flowing over" them and the long exposure. I'd say it's intentional. - Benh (talk) 17:46, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose for now. I don't mind too much it looking unnatural, long exposure is a legitimate technique. But there are some technical issues here, the horizon seems slightly curved, and there's a weird speckly pattern of white dots across a lot of the picture. I'm not sure what's causing it. It's especially obvious when you look at the bottom left corner, but it's visible in a lot of the photo. Cmao20 (talk) 18:54, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
The dots is something that occur with some sensors in dark areas at long exposure. They are usually white but can have bright colors. No idea why they show up, but I have the same problem with my Panasonic but not with the small Sony. For good photos, I have to clone them out at 300% magnification. A h**l of a job, it can take hours! <sigh> Example, this unedited photo has them galore all over the image, especially at the bottom. Even another FPC has them. --Cart (talk) 19:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Understood. I can appreciate how much of a nuisance it would be to get rid of these, but I think for FP errors like this really should be corrected. Cmao20 (talk) 23:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I agree, and for my part, I do it on all my photos I upload here, not only those I want to nominate at FPC. :) --Cart (talk) 00:35, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cart, I don't know if it's the case here but what you describe are so-called hotpixels that are caused by the sensor itself while it heats up during a long exposure. Ironically your cameras share the same Sony sensor, so I guess that the RX100 dissipates the heat better than your Lumix. BTW, my Lumix cameras have got a menu option called "Long Shtr NR". When activated the camera overlays a second exposure over the first in order to get rid of these nasty hotpixels. In my cameras it works quite well. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:55, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Baso! I knew they are called hotpixels but I had no idea what caused them. Looking at how the Sony handles other aspects of photos, I suspect that it overall has better in-camera software to process the information from the sensor. The small-lens-Sony delivers more pleasant night images over all than the grainy, but sharper photos from the larger-Leica/Vario-lens on the Panasonic. Will take a look at the menu option you mention. Thanks again. :) --Cart (talk) 16:50, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Like most of the pictures uploaded by this user, it is overprocessed -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:05, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Basile Morin. --Grtek (talk) 10:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination. Thank you! Andrei (talk) 15:00, 28 March 2020 (UTC).[reply]

File:Edelkastanie.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 10:33:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family_:_Fagaceae/Castenea sativa
Info created by Fischer.H - uploaded by Fischer.H - nominated by Fischer.H -- Fischer.H (talk) 10:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Fischer.H (talk) 10:33, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Pretty plant, but doesn't seem that sharp, and the background is noisy plus dust spots. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Fixed spelling of section name. You have to spell it exactly like on the gallery page, or the Bot will not be able to sort it. Best way is to go to the page and copy it. --Cart (talk) 10:52, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan - interesting and useful picture but not sharp enough for FP. There are a few haloes around the leaves at the bottom. And the background is a little noisy, I agree. Cmao20 (talk) 18:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Tight crop (ahem) and leaves splaying all over the place in an unappealingly random fashion. Daniel Case (talk) 16:15, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Fischer.H (talk) 16:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Burns Building, Lincoln University Campus, New Zealand 20.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2020 at 06:21:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#New Zealand
Info created & uploaded by User:Podzemnik - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Nice "abstract" form and no significant invasion of privacy (I checked carefully, I think). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:21, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 06:50, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:55, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks Ikan, I like this one. --Podzemnik (talk) 07:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Me too. Thanks for taking it and uploading it! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:44, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Nice -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:41, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:13, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 08:58, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:06, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support Nice but moderate on wow effect, we have already seen a bunch of similar images Poco a poco (talk) 18:36, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:18, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 06:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:15, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beauty in what could easily be dismissed as ugliness. And an unexpected and delightful switch from portraying New Zealand as an uninterrupted landscape of beautiful wild mountain ranges. Daniel Case (talk) 17:21, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Kind of like the opening scene of Once Were Warriors. Do you remember that one? ;-) --Cart (talk) 22:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@W.carter: Haven't seen it, unfortunately. Maybe now that there's a wealth of time ... Daniel Case (talk) 23:22, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Andrei (talk) 09:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:44, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 18:33, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:40, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#New Zealand

File:White-lined tanager (Tachyphonus rufus) female.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2020 at 12:42:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Thraupidae_(Tanagers_and_Allies)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charles (talk) 12:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charles (talk) 12:42, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose blurry branch is too distracting, and bird's sharpness could be better. --Ivar (talk) 14:41, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above, also the overexposed areas are distracting Poco a poco (talk) 18:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Gotta go with Ivar on this one, sorry.--Peulle (talk) 20:48, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
(strike)withdrawn(strike) I'll go with the majority. Charles (talk) 20:50, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Too bad: Everything important is quite sharp. Good details on breast feathers. Great perspective to see the bird's proportions. Wonderful eye with just the right amount of sky reflection. --Axel ^(talk) 22:22, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support We might end up with a different majority ;-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:58, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks Frank, I've cancelled my withdrawn in the anticipation of a deluge of new opinions! Charles (talk) 08:46, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support I actually like it very much. -- B2Belgium (talk) 12:40, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I like it, but I'm concerned about the blurry branch. :\ --pandakekok9 13:04, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:42, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 10:31, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

* Neutral I like the photo itself but I concede to Iifar. Augend (talk) 03:28, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." You have not enough time or edits. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. :-) --Cart (talk) 09:37, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 13:41, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Thraupidae_(Tanagers_and_Allies)

File:SL Kandy asv2020-01 img47 Degaldoruwa Temple.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 Mar 2020 at 15:30:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Sri Lanka
Info Shrine room with the Reclining Buddha statue in Degaldoruwa rock temple in Kandy ---- all by A.Savin --A.Savin 15:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 15:30, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Interesting place but a bit noisy and a few distortions visible. It's not a bad shot but I'm really not sure if it's an FP or not. Cmao20 (talk) 19:28, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cbrescia (talk) 02:20, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but I'm really not sure about the cut feet. - Benh (talk) 19:16, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 04:44, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

* Weak oppose I approve of the cultural significance and I think this image is interesting, but I must agree to the technical drawbacks proposed by Cmao and Benh. Excellent on the whole though. Augend (talk) 03:30, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, invalid vote. The rules are: "Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." You have not enough time or edits. Welcome back later when you have made more edits. :-) --Cart (talk) 09:38, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Benh. --pandakekok9 05:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The light seems to be too harsh for me. And per Benh. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 11:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /--MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:14, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Albi Sainte-Cécile Cathedral Roodscreen 2009-06-25.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 09:24:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#France
Info all by Benh (talk) 09:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another very very old picture (2009) that I finally processed (have time these days...). -- Benh (talk) 09:24, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support the people in the lower right corner are creating ghosts that are a little distracting, could you remove it?. The quality and size of the photo is incredible --Wilfredor (talk) 12:23, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Could be... but I warn you, it took me 11 years to fill a gap because I only recently found the material to do so... It's a bit hard to clone the people out and still be faithful the the content behind them. - Benh (talk) 12:43, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It is always better to wait for people to leave to take a photo in that area and then do a selective removal using multiple layers of just that area. If people do not leave the place for hours then I try to perform a shot where people ares focused that way as part of the composition. I disagree with cloning unpredictable areas by removing artistic details, however wood, stone or concrete could be cloned. --Wilfredor (talk) 14:34, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Very nice --Uoaei1 (talk) 12:51, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Too immense and high quality to let a few ghosts bother me. Cmao20 (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 16:11, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 20:05, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:34, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 11:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:30, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:42, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:42, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:49, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 19:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#France

File:Distorsio anus 01.JPG, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 06:03:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Classis_:_Gastropoda#Cladus_:_Littorinimorpha#Familia_:_Personidae#Genus_:_Distorsio
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 06:03, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:13, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:13, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful shell. How did it get its odd Latin name? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:48, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment The original description of Linné, "Systema naturae per regna tria naturae :secundum classes, ordines, genera, species, cum characteribus, differentiis, synonymis, locis.", 1758, Vol. 1, p. 750 reads as follows: "Testa suturis labiisque dilatato-membranaceis, gibbosa reticulato tuberculata, apertura sinuosa, caudata erecta". That's all. No comment on the origin of the species name "anus". But he cites also six older (Pre-Linnean) authors. That means, the shell was already known before Linné, and the name was possibly given far before 1758. --Llez (talk) 10:13, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:09, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 11:19, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support as ever. Cmao20 (talk) 15:39, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:10, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 18:07, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Cmao --Ermell (talk) 20:11, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:26, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:19, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 06:10, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:18, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:11, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:43, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 19:37, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Classis_:_Gastropoda#Cladus_:_Littorinimorpha#Familia_:_Personidae#Genus_:_Distorsio

File:German shepard female.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 13:31:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info All by PROPOLI87 -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 13:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PROPOLI87 (talk) 13:31, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have fixed the nom for you, yet again. It will be a day of celebration for me when you learn how to make correct noms. --Cart (talk) 13:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot again, I'm a certain age and will never learn! I'm trying though!PROPOLI87 (talk) 13:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 13:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You only have to copy the name of the file from the file page, in this case it would have been German shepard female.jpg, to the box at FPC and save the new page. I can't see how complicated that is. --Cart (talk) 13:56, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

yes I had done it, but then I took it off because the photo appeared to me on the right instead of like all the others that are on the left. I was trying to figure out why, and I saw instead that you were fixing up and thank you for that. PROPOLI87 (talk) 15:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 15:08, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose You're going to struggle to achieve FP sharpness with this camera, particularly if you crop your images. Charles (talk) 14:49, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The lower sharpness probably depends on why I had to use the zoom, because otherwise I would have missed the right moment that the dog was looking at the camera, waiting for me. I did not cut the photo excessively, I reduced the size to look for greater sharpness but evidently it was not enough. Thanks for the comment. Thanks to your comments I am trying to improve the quality of my photos. PROPOLI87 (talk) 17:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 17:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, so you downsampled which is not allowed. And if you used digital zoom, that's a no-no on a bridge camera. And the dog is not looking at the camera. You really ought to try to get youtr images past QI before coming here. Then we'll all stop wasting our time. Charles (talk) 18:29, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per Charles. There's nothing especially wrong with this photo, the framing is fine and the dog is looking at the camera, but it doesn't match up to the sharpest animal photos at FP. I think I'd give this a go at QI, I suspect it would probably pass. Cmao20 (talk) 15:48, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the advice. I did it! PROPOLI87 (talk) 17:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 (talk) 17:00, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. FP is for the very best photos on the site - that's a very high standard and should be. I agree that this is a fairly good photo, but the head in particular is not very sharp. I will oppose at QIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:01, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Peulle (talk) 20:54, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles; I also wonder why someone couldn't have brushed the dog's back before the picture was taken. Daniel Case (talk) 03:58, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 00:06, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Eilat Dolphin Reef (3).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2020 at 23:44:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Delphinidae (Oceanic Dolphins)
Info created by טל שמע - uploaded by טל שמע (Tal Shema) - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 23:44, 24 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support —kallerna (talk) 06:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support stunning --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow. I first thought this image is rendered. -- -donald- (talk) 08:36, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 09:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 09:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 09:56, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay ^talk 10:31, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 10:32, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support a shame about the sharp shadows, but again what a nice photo from that photographer... - Benh (talk) 11:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitely wow! Charles (talk) 14:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 15:37, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:15, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing photo, brilliant quality for an underwater shot. Cmao20 (talk) 18:46, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:48, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Marvellous.--Mile (talk) 08:08, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:35, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:07, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:40, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:47, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support + 1 --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:51, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 17:31, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 25 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:25, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Delphinidae (Oceanic Dolphins)

Commons:Featured picture candidates/

File:Oso pardo (Ursus arctos), Parque Estatal de Recreo del Lago Chilkoot, Haines, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-26, DD 03.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Apr 2020 at 19:09:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Ursidae (Bears)
Info Brown bear (Ursus arctos) running after capturing what seems to be a Sockeye salmon (Oncorhynchus nerka), Chilkoot Lake State Recreation Site, Haines, Alaska, USA. c/u/n by me, Poco a poco (talk) 19:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info And once again: Gallery fixed. Please try to get this right, you need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 19:27, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry Cart, I looked for the gallery but couldn't find it among Mammalia, as I understood it like this that all Mammalia are included there. We could rename it to something like "Other Mammals". Poco a poco (talk) 21:27, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure that is necessary. 'Artiodactyla' and 'Carnivora' have so many images, they have got their own pages branched off. It's just like with some countries under Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural or some groups of plants under Commons:Featured pictures/Plants. It seems to be working for most users since there are pictures/links to them at the top of each gallery page. But I'll try to make it even more visible. --Cart (talk) 21:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed 'Artiodactyla' and 'Carnivora' are now included in the Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals list (alphabetically) the same way that for example 'Germany' is in 'Natural'. I think you can find them next time. I did the same for 'Asparagales' and 'Asterales' in Plants. Take a look. Also, the 'Carnivora' (and the others) was/is listed in the template you get a link to each time you create a nomination so it shouldn't be that hard to see. --Cart (talk) 22:10, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support A bit noisy but IMO OK for an action shot. Nice capture, something new for FP. Cmao20 (talk) 19:51, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao. - Benh (talk) 20:09, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:56, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao.--Ermell (talk) 23:30, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 09:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice capture, but completely out of focus and noisy. Charles (talk) 09:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao. IMHO the head is in focus. --Aristeas (talk) 11:21, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Charles. Also since the bear is facing away from the camera. -- B2Belgium (talk) 13:46, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above, sorry. --Ivar (talk) 16:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Wrong moment, sorry --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 17:10, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles and Frank. --Cart (talk) 08:53, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others — Preceding unsigned comment added by El Grafo (talk • contribs)
I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 15:03, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Poco a poco (talk) 15:04, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mallee ringneck - Patchewollock Conservation Reserve.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 09:00:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Psittaculidae_(True_Parrots)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Ivar (talk) 09:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 09:00, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Andrei (talk) 09:41, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 12:40, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 13:25, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 14:51, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment we are lucky JJ Harrison shares his birdies with us with little (any?) concessions. But I think he goes a bit too far with the selective NR. It's like the bird is pasted into a clean background and I notice that effect even on the thumbnails. - Benh (talk) 17:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Benh: imho this kind of background is perfect and "clean", because it has objects far away from the bird. Imo this has nothing to do with the NR, which is used only to take down noise. --Ivar (talk) 18:06, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I registered that long focals and small subjects yield blurry background. But it's very obvious that Noodles does selective NR and he's quite heavy handed on that. So the main subject tend to stand out even more. Here it's noticeable even on the thumbnail. It's like the bird was pasted afterwards (I know it isn't) - Benh (talk) 18:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Benh, JJ H and the pros and cons about his $11,000 special lens, have been chewed about over and over again on both Wikipedia and Commons. Half the users seems to love this expensive toy, other hate it. It is good for some shots, not so much for other. --Cart (talk) 20:05, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

OK this will be my last comment on it. I know that these lenses come with shallow DOF. Not discussing pros and cons. But Noodles adds on top a heavy selective NR. And it's what gives that "layer pasted on another" effect here. The edge around the head is likely not from the lens, but from processing. Not a deal breaker, but wanted to point out that sometimes even the very best go a bit overboard. - Benh (talk) 20:16, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"sometimes even the very best go a bit overboard" - oh yes! Totally agree with you on that. I have lately seen people using some photographers' other images as a reason for voting for their photo. But as you say, all can fall sometimes. We should always look at the photo in front of us and not be swayed by earlier accomplishments. --Cart (talk) 20:39, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I was talking "going overboard with the processing of the photo", not their behaviour :) (but I agree). - Benh (talk) 20:55, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I understood what you meant and that's what I was talking about too. But I can see how this could be read two ways. :) --Cart (talk) 20:59, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:14, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another solid FP from JJ Harrison. Cmao20 (talk) 18:50, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 22:02, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:59, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:08, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:38, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:54, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:13, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:40, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:27, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Psittaculidae_(True_Parrots)

File:Caverna Santana por Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton (01).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 16:49:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Brazil
Info all by myself -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 16:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 16:49, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 18:44, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Difficult picture unfortunately not well implemented. Strong image noise alternates with strongly denoised areas. The hot pixel should be removed.--Ermell (talk) 20:38, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing light in the background -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:56, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per others. Great idea, but unfortunately takes in enough that the composition is sort of in conflict with itself. Daniel Case (talk) 20:20, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:27, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cloister of Priory Saint-Michel of Grandmont (6).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 13:22:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#France
Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 13:22, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Abstain -- Tournasol7 (talk) 13:22, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Might it be tilted, looking at the steps? Charles (talk) 16:23, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I would support this, but I also have the impression that it is tilted clockwise. --Aristeas (talk) 11:28, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The tilt should be corrected of course, but it's really not special enough for FP for me. Daniel Case (talk) 15:57, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 0 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:27, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pedro Figari - Pericón - Google Art Project-edited.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 15:27:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Groups
Info created by Pedro Figari - uploaded by DcoetzeeBot - improved/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 15:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 15:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment tilted. Charles (talk) 16:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done thanks!! --Ezarateesteban 17:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 18:46, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not one of the Google Art Project's better digitisations. The detail looks quite blurry - in the best painting digitisations I've seen, a lot of the fine brushwork is visible, but we are a fair distance away from that here. I think there are some JPEG artefacts too. I don't think I can forgive these issues given that the resolution isn't that high (even lower when you consider that a lot of the picture is taken up with the frame). Cmao20 (talk) 18:58, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not detailed enough --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. And because of the frame. --pandakekok9 07:29, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 15:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:27, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sporthilfe-Gala 2019 Sportler des Jahres Österreich Verena Preiner Aufsteigerin des Jahres c.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 Mar 2020 at 13:15:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Women
Info created & uploaded by Tsui - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 13:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 13:15, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:27, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:53, 21 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Striking portrait. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The viewpoint is not ideal for a portrait, lights in the background are distracting. Static, dull pose. —kallerna (talk) 09:19, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting perspective matching the situation. Habitator terrae 🌍 13:13, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 18:24, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 19:24, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Seven Pandas (talk) 20:34, 22 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kallerna. Daniel Case (talk) 04:00, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:17, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:46, 23 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Kallerna. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 11:34, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:26, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: People/Portrait#Women

File:Krabbenspinne Misumena vatia auf Sonnenblume-20190727-RM-075353.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 21:35:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Thomisidae (Crab Spiders)
Info Crab spider in the centre of a sunflower. Focus stack of 8 frames. All by Ermell -- Ermell (talk) 21:35, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:35, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Damn this is amazing... One of those pics which makes you want to read at the caption to get what is going on. Super composition and all. - Benh (talk) 21:42, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --The Cosmonaut (talk) 23:08, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Benh, this is a stunning photo and I'd have nominated it myself if you hadn't got round to it. Cmao20 (talk) 23:38, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cart (talk) 00:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Strong support A few days ago I discovered this image among the Photo Challenge submissions (subject: "Nature's yellows") and immediately found it amazing. Striking picture and excellent quality, great as FP -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:54, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Podzemnik (talk) 04:52, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 06:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow. --pandakekok9 07:25, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:07, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 08:54, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:57, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice composition. Not everyone may know that some crab spiders change colour to match the flowers they hide in. Charles (talk) 09:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 11:35, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support holy s$%$# !!. I do not know if the white balance is good, the rest is an excellent photograph --Wilfredor (talk) 12:44, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:39, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:02, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Question Could you explain what are those strange borders around at edges (see note). Color all around is different, it in on all sides, like cut of sqaure. --Mile (talk) 17:09, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I can't see them! Charles (talk) 18:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
+1 No idea what you are talking about. I examined the photo in different settings and could not see any borders. --Cart (talk) 18:24, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Charlesjsharp and W.carter: See this. Once you find the line, you can follow it around the picture's edges. CC Ermell. --Podzemnik (talk) 19:46, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Podz, now I see it. Looks like the stacking program has been up to something. Should be easy to fix, I'm sure Ermell will take care of it. --Cart (talk) 19:55, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

When you see it, it's so obvious. Will keep support vote in anticipiation of a re-stack. Charles (talk) 20:16, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done@PetarM, Podzemnik, Charlesjsharp, and W.carter: Sorry, at the end of the work I just didn't look at the edge anymore. Thanks for the tip. I hope that's all right. Thank you all for your support.--Ermell (talk) 21:19, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:38, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Junior Jumper (formerly Tæ) 12:39, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Definitely FP Poco a poco (talk) 17:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support really excellent — Rhododendrites ^talk | 23:00, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others. --Aristeas (talk) 11:29, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support wow. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 16:12, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 17:35, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Since all picture is in focus - no shallow DOF was needed - i would recomend f/7.1 or 8 using Zuiko 60mm. --Mile (talk) 12:58, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. Obviously DoF not so important with focus-stacking, but most lenses will perform better at F8 than at the F4.5 chosen. And reduce the chance of blur between stacks. Charles (talk) 18:32, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Cbrescia (talk) 19:58, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 28 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /pandakekok9 06:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Thomisidae (Crab Spiders)

File:Organic home-grown tomatoes - unripe to ripe.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 23:54:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits and raw vegetables
Info All by me. As of today, we're in self-isolation for the next 4 weeks or more in New Zealand. I thought I'd experiment a bit with things around me - this is my first shot. These are home-grown tomatoes, unripe to ripe, sorted in a circle. -- Podzemnik (talk) 23:54, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Podzemnik (talk) 23:54, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Of course. Even if this crisis is horrible and we could all do without it, it seems that FPC is benefiting from it since photographers take photos of things other than their usual subjects. --Cart (talk) 00:49, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@W.carter: Yup, even when we're stuck at home, we can use this time in a positive and productive way. --Podzemnik (talk) 04:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support - Creative and nice. Are you going to make tomato sauce? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: Chutney actually. FP candidate will come soon --Podzemnik (talk) 04:51, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yum! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:33, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay ^talk 05:33, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Creative. --pandakekok9 07:22, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 08:08, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- B2Belgium (talk) 08:37, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Benh (talk) 09:06, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support funny idea --Wilfredor (talk) 12:42, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 13:14, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:40, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 15:45, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 16:05, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Reminds me of this old FP classic ;) --A.Savin 18:17, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I knew it! This is why it feels like I've seen something like this before... pandakekok9 03:41, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautifully done. Cmao20 (talk) 22:37, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:37, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:55, 27 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:47, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Grtek (talk) 10:50, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:26, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:44, 29 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /pandakekok9 06:24, 31 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Fruits and raw vegetables

File:Pedro Figari - Pericón - Google Art Project-edited.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2020 at 15:27:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/People#Groups
Info created by Pedro Figari - uploaded by DcoetzeeBot - improved/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 15:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 15:27, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Comment tilted. Charles (talk) 16:17, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done thanks!! --Ezarateesteban 17:12, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Info Gallery fixed. You need to really check out and find the exact gallery and section since the FPCBot is now sorting pictures automatically. Go to the gallery page and copy the page name and heading to get the spelling right. For more info see this. --Cart (talk) 18:46, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not one of the Google Art Project's better digitisations. The detail looks quite blurry - in the best painting digitisations I've seen, a lot of the fine brushwork is visible, but we are a fair distance away from that here. I think there are some JPEG artefacts too. I don't think I can forgive these issues given that the resolution isn't that high (even lower when you consider that a lot of the picture is taken up with the frame). Cmao20 (talk) 18:58, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not detailed enough --Michielverbeek (talk) 21:13, 25 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. And because of the frame. --pandakekok9 07:29, 26 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 15:59, 28 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:27, 30 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]