Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/May 2022

File:Bostulp (Tulipa sylvestris), zwellende bloemknop. 24-03-2022 (d.j.b.) 01.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2022 at 15:16:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Liliaceae
Info Swelling flower bud of a woodland tulip (Tulipa sylvestris). Focus stack of 35 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:16, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good quality; the fine color marbling makes the photo special, it gives some vividness to it. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:48, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:53, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 19:39, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:25, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the combo of colors here. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 08:20, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:08, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452438 09:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:42, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 16:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very sensual. Daniel Case (talk) 18:06, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:12, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:58, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Parque estatal Chugach, Alaska, Estados Unidos, 2017-08-22, DD 106.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2022 at 16:38:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/United States#Alaska
Info Fascinating snowy landscape by Poco with incredible textures in the ice. There are these three FPs that have some similarities but I think they are different enough that this one can be featured too. Created by Poco a poco - uploaded by Poco a poco - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:38, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cool catch, thank you Cmao20! It was fascinating to observe all those places from the air Poco a poco (talk) 16:57, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:52, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support this photo makes me want to go to Alaska so badly :-) --SHB2000 (talk) 04:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Formidable landscape. --Aristeas (talk) 08:22, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:55, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:28, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:05, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451536 09:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:32, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:12, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 15:01, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:50, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:57, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/United States#Alaska

File:Edinburgh from the air, 1920.jpg (delist), not delisted

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2022 at 14:06:18

Info Even if it survives the deletion nomination, I think it's fairly clear that the claim this is out of copyright is exceptionally weak. The museum credits the copyright to Buckham's descendants explicitly, and Buckham died in 1956, so we're a little under 5 years early for Life+70. The only way I can see this as being out of copyright in the UK is if it somehow counted as Crown Copyright, but there's no evidence for that, and the National Gallery of Scotland's credit of the copyright to Buckham's heirs speaks strongly against it. (Original nomination)
Delist -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 14:06, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see the point of this Delist proposal. Either it is a copyvio, and then it should be deleted, or it is not, and then it can stay as FP. Yann (talk) 15:11, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
per Yann. As long as the copyright violation is not clearly proven, I would favor to keep the photo. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see... how it isn't proven, and that's kind of the problem. There's only one possible way - Crown copyright - this isn't a copyright violation, and there's literally no evidence of that, and incredibly strong evidence - the actual source - saying this is definitely under UK copyright. The complacency about copyright around a pretty clearcut case is why I'm nominating it here. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:13, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This discussion is just a duplicate of the DR mentioned above. It is better to have the whole discussion at one place only. Yann (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. I don't see how this is relevant here. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:54, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the explanatory information and the reference to the original discussion. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Abstain Let's defer to the DD here ... if the image is deleted this discussion is moot. Daniel Case (talk) 17:54, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Keep There's a good chance that it will be deleted. But there's also a good chance that it will be undeleted rather soon (2027), and I think it would only be fair if it would still be considered a FP when it comes back. --El Grafo (talk) 08:07, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No question. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:01, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 delist, 1 keep, 0 neutral => not delisted. /--Aristeas (talk) 05:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Female northern pintail in flight-1827.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2022 at 08:12:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Anas
Info created & uploaded by Frank Schulenburg - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:12, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:12, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 11:00, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 14:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very elegant. --Aristeas (talk) 08:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451675 09:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I don't know what our standards are for sharpness of birds in flight, but this one is very pretty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:26, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:35, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of our best bird-in-flight pics. Daniel Case (talk) 18:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing - Benh (talk) 22:10, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 11:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus : Anas

File:Dorothy Houston Jacobson 1967 - Crop.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 May 2022 at 19:50:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#People_at_work
Info created by United States Department of Agriculture - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:50, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:50, 22 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I prefer the original, with part of a picture in the upper middle. Please nominate that (as an alternate if you like, but I think this is the alternate). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452031 00:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Hulged (talk) 12:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative: File:Dorothy Houston Jacobson 1967.jpg

Also support. This is the uncropped version, still fully restored. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:21, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:18, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The cropped version is actually better. Yann (talk) 18:08, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:24, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯Sphere! 16:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452413 00:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support this too but I prefer the cropped version. Hulged (talk) 12:34, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support to make the consensus count for something Cmao20 (talk) 07:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Forgive me if this went weird for a moment. I was trying to remove a speck I noticed, and maintaining the cropped version exactly the same caused me to get confused enough that it took a lot of uploads to get it back to right. Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC))[reply]

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

The chosen alternative is: File:Dorothy Houston Jacobson 1967.jpg

File:Walsauerklee Oxalis acetosella-20220422-RM-153749.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2022 at 21:38:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants
Info Wood Sorrel (Oxalis acetosella). Focus stack of 30 frames. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 21:38, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Wood sorrel flowers are very small. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:03, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --IamMM (talk) 03:48, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:29, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:08, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:09, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wonderful. --Aristeas (talk) 08:27, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451848 09:14, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -donald- (talk) 10:50, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:28, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:41, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 17:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:39, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:08, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:29, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:32, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 14:08, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:29, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:42, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support (but you might want to fix the typo in the file name afterwards: Waldsauerklee.) --El Grafo (talk) 07:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 10:09, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:55, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 09:17, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 11:40, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Beautiful Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 07:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:31, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 29 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 06:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants

File:Altschlossfelsen 39.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2022 at 06:18:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Rhineland-Palatinate
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:18, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 06:18, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 12:39, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose No wow for me. Daniel Case (talk) 19:34, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:10, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel. --Till (talk) 12:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:00, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451008 00:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The lighting looks very flat to me. Moving the flash off-camera probably could have helped to make those (otherwise very interesting) pillars look more 3D. There are many other shots in that series that work much better for me. --El Grafo (talk) 13:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A special photo for me. Perhaps the views could be made a little lighter and brighter.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:45, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:48, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Istanbul asv2021-11 img60 Yedikule.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2022 at 12:56:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Turkey
Info Airview with Yedikule Fortress and Samatya quarter, Istanbul; all by me. --A.Savin 12:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:56, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely view Cmao20 (talk) 13:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Beautiful at full page on both my browsers, but at larger sizes (even 30% of full size), the amount of what appears to be noisy smog in the distance is disturbing and gives me pause in considering whether this is one of the greatest urban panoramas on Commons, not because this is not a very good photo - it is - but because of just how high the bar is, when I think about some other urban panoramas we've been featuring. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:10, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 21:47, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A less common, very interesting perspective on the magnificent city. The background becomes less detailed and less colourful due to smog; but in the end the smog is a genuine feature of modern metropoleis, so I cannot blame the photo for showing that. (And even before modern times painters have used the technique Verblauen – the colours fade and become the more bluish the farer away a feature is – to add depth to their landscape paintings ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 19:10, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The record of smog is valuable, as hopefully a period of past history in a future of renewable energy, but is it beautiful or great? That's my dilemma, whether to vote for the rest of the photo, oppose because of the smog or just not vote. So far, not voting has won out for me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I understand, Ikan, and in no way did I mean to criticize you. I just saw the danger that readers may only see the negative side of your well-balanced statement about the smog. Several times I have observed that as soon as someone has raised a convincing objection against a picture, others only join in with a “per”. There is nothing to be said against the “per” (I also often vote with “per”), but it is a pity when the discussion becomes one-sided too quickly – in my opinion, every good picture deserves a broader discussion that points out its pros and cons. So I try to emphasize the strengths of an image – to stimulate discussion and to contribute hereby to a fair overall outcome; especially when I find that an argument (like the smog here) can also be interpreted the other way around. Best, --Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's alright; I didn't feel attacked, I just had an additional thought. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:23, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451127 00:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:04, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. -- Karelj (talk) 13:27, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:47, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:View from pt 1854, Black Range, New Zealand.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2022 at 13:07:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/New Zealand#Canterbury (Waitaha)
Info We haven't seen any of Podzemnik's mountain panoramas lately so I thought it would be nice to nominate one. I enjoy the misty atmosphere here, and the panorama is even more interesting to explore at full size. I can't find any FPs from this location. created by Podzemnik - uploaded by Podzemnik - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 13:07, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:05, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 16:11, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Perhaps due to the filtered light, the features in the shaded part of the background, at left, particularly the forests, look unnatural at full size. Daniel Case (talk) 21:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question 'Filtered light'? Cmao20 (talk) 13:38, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There are parts of the mountains where it's clear the sun is less obscured than others. Daniel Case (talk) 02:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:15, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯Sphere! 16:52, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great mountain panorama for me. --Domob (talk) 16:56, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nomination. --Aristeas (talk) 06:01, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451914 00:58, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 05:03, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 15:56, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:42, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:59, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Micha (talk) 15:10, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:36, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/New Zealand#Canterbury (Waitaha)

File:На фоні грозових хмар.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 May 2022 at 19:59:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
Info created & uploaded by Byrdyak - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:59, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is what's called a high-key photo, isn't it? It's awesome! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:33, 23 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose Lovely color and striking contrast, but unsharp in too many places. Daniel Case (talk) 02:04, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:14, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support IMHO this is all about the composition, the light and the contrasting colours, and the result is stunning. Regarding sharpness: I guess this was taken with a long telephoto lens and the items in this photo are in reality far away from each other, hence it was not possible to get all of them in focus. This does not bother me. First, I like Feininger’s idea that telephoto photos should intentionally use the contrast of sharpness and unsharpness to create a sense of depth (while wide-angle photos should use the contrast of relative sizes for that purpose). Second, the most distinct feature – the biggest tree on the right – is really sharp and the other trees are quite sharp, too; the field is only used as a foreground, we do not need to distinguish the individual plants on it, because the photo is (as said above) all about composition, light and colours. Sorry for so many words; as a non-native speaker, I often find it difficult to express things concisely ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 10:50, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel sorry. --A.Savin 12:45, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support superb colours and composition, and I'm not really seeing the problems with image quality Cmao20 (talk) 13:46, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Cmao20. -- Radomianin (talk) 13:53, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Daniel.--Ermell (talk) 14:13, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Daniel. Looks awesome in the preview, but unfortunately too blurry in full size. --Domob (talk) 16:55, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support First, I agree with Daniel – the quality is below what can be excused for at 13.5 mp resolution, and I usually don’t support nominations showing such flaws. However, this shot is so remarkable IMHO with its stunning light, and having the Ukrainian flag inside it is even greater, so I will make an exception for this one. This certainly has POTY potential. Pity for the softness though. --Kreuz schnabel 13:04, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same as File:Leafy tree in green paddy fields.jpg but insufficient quality and no metadata -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:29, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kreuzschnabel --Andrei (talk) 07:26, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support per above. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:43, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Original, great compo and colors, FP to me although the quality isn't the best Poco a poco (talk) 10:22, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too blurry for FP --Milseburg (talk) 11:53, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 14:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:42, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haltern am See, Westruper Heide -- 2021 -- 4758.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 08:26:46 (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 💬 08:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 08:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Perfectly nice, but no great composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:23, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but I agree with Ikan here. This is a very pretty photo but I am not seeing a great compositional idea. Maybe I just see too many landscapes like this where I live for it to impress me Cmao20 (talk) 21:22, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dull light. Nothing special here in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:56, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thank you for your reviews. I think it's better to withdraw. --XRay 💬 04:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /XRay 💬 04:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Sihlwald Herbst panosphere 20211109.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2022 at 16:26:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Zürich
Info created by Domob - uploaded by Domob - nominated by Domob -- Domob (talk) 16:26, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Sihlwald is a protected forest area near Zürich. For me, this panorama shows the characteristics of this forest very well (note the fallen trees which are left alone), and also represents the general theme of autumn in a European forest in a very immersive way. --Domob (talk) 16:26, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This is a spherical panoramic, intended to be viewed with an immersive viewer. You can do so with the link on the file page, but note that this viewer shows only a limited resolution and image quality for some reason. An alternative is a stand-alone viewer like Panini. --Domob (talk) 16:26, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Domob (talk) 16:26, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support When viewed in the 360 viewer this is quite an achievement, and I don't mind the featureless sky Cmao20 (talk) 18:35, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, it’s nice but I just don’t see anything outstanding here. --Kreuz schnabel 12:50, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support May not be super pretty but to me it captures autumn in the deep woods. Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Kreuz. I don't think we would be considering this nomination if it were a 2D representation of the same motif. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:58, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Obviously I like spherical panoramics and the immersiveness they generate (note that we have almost none of them as FPs of natural places), that's why I create and nominate them. But I think this place and its "unspoiled autumn vibes" would certainly also make it a valid FPC to me in a 2D picture. But that is of course a matter of taste, and I appreciate your opinion and can see this point of view. --Domob (talk) 04:16, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:02, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Karelj (talk) 21:04, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:25, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Vorfrühling am Bodensee.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 May 2022 at 14:27:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
Info Far view over Lake Constance to the Alps. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 14:27, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Excellent image quality as usual for you. I must admit I didn't see much of interest in the composition at first, but viewing it at full size I do think it's interesting enough for FP Cmao20 (talk) 18:33, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fascinating scenery but too many stitching errors visible.--Ermell (talk) 19:19, 24 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell, and to me the scenery generally really doesn't stand out. Daniel Case (talk) 18:09, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question @Daniel Case and Ermell: Please mark the stitching errors. --Milseburg (talk) 19:17, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment If you follow the upper white coastal line, you can clearly see the slight steps. On the water surface below, you can also see the seam. This can only be seen in the enlargement. --Ermell (talk) 19:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Comment Special in my eyes is the far view. I fixed what I think User:Ermell meant. But notice, that the opposite shore isn't straight and the water is varied moved.--Milseburg (talk) 22:29, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. --SHB2000 (talk) 05:02, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. -- Karelj (talk) 13:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Dark. Bad light in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Info I'm afraid this nomination is lost. But I spent more light. --Milseburg (talk) 09:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per other opposers. --Ivar (talk) 06:19, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:26, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Il trovatore by Luigi Morgari.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2022 at 00:13:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Luigi Morgari - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info This is one of my most difficult restorations of late. It took me three days. During which I was having sleep issues so wasn't doing that much else. It's a fun one to flip between original and restoration on; it's like watching damage fall away. As for content, it's that classic opera prank: Ha ha! That person you just had killed was your long-lost brother! We sure fooled you! Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:18, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really good poster and restoration. Talk to us about your choice to darken everything but the brightest highlights and increase the contrast. You've found that things lighten over time, right? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:17, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, though I think Wikipedia's background of pure white exaggerated how dark it actually is in thumbnail. It's not really that dark, but it does use the dramatic lighting well. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:05, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good illustration and restoration. It appears rather dark, yes, but I remember that such illustrations from that period are often rather dark; I guess they strived for a dramatic chiaroscuro effect. --Aristeas (talk) 08:44, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:48, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:05, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:31, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:30, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 05:14, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera

File:Escale à Sète 2022 D.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2022 at 10:31:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Sailing_ships
Info created - uploaded - nominated by me. -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 10:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Neutral~~ (for now) I noticed it on Flickr. Very nice one but maybe slightly over "clarified" - Benh (talk) 11:41, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You are right on the fact that there is "some" clarity :), as the clarity level is at +80 with Lightromm. But I don't plan to decrease it as I actually like it like that. However thanks you for the comment. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:32, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Then I'm very sorry but that's an

Oppose for me :( Very beautiful picture, but the clarity trigger was pushed too far to my tastes. - Benh (talk) 09:33, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:23, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 12:31, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Possibly over-saturated, but the light is special, and the composition great in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 14:11, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, without prejudice to any edits that might be made to the white balance, etc. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:56, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 19:43, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A very French photo Cmao20 (talk) 20:24, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – a very colourful photo. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:51, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great atmosphere and light. --Aristeas (talk) 08:19, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:54, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support For the record: I'm convinced that even a completely unrealistic post card perfect style edit can, in principle, be a FP - if it's done well. This is not one of those images, though. Content-wise it's a really cool mix of post card idyll (ship, lighting, reflections) and the "real" world (cracked walls, wires, air conditioning, antennas ...). With that in mind, the editing is hitting just the right spot between a neutral, bland, don't-you-dare-touching-that-saturation-slider style image and 500px. --El Grafo (talk) 09:06, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Slight perspective issue at the right, but it doesn't have to be rectified. Daniel Case (talk) 02:09, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451647 09:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:34, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 15:43, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice colours and compo Poco a poco (talk) 10:13, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:47, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 13:17, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:08, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Sailing_ships

File:Peces mariposa del mar Rojo (Chaetodon semilarvatus), Temple, Sharm el-Sheij, Egipto, 2022-03-26, DD, DD 16.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2022 at 10:39:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Chaetodontidae_(Butterflyfishes)
Info 15 cm (5.9 in) long bluecheek butterflyfishes (Chaetodon semilarvatus), Temple, Sharm el-Sheikh, Red Sea, Egypt. This species is found in the northwestern Indian Ocean where it occurs in the Red Sea and the Gulf of Aden, as Far East as the coast of Oman. The bluecheek butterflyfish eats hard corals as well as benthic invertebrates and is one of the few fish species to have long-term mates and therefore are recorded often in pairs. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 10:39, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 10:39, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I really wanted to support, but the focus is on the coral rather than on the fishes... Still can't get to oppose this otherwise gorgeous shot. - Benh (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, and a good, dynamic composition. I have no problem with the focus on the coral; just maybe the name of the photo and its file description might be changed after the nomination period is over to reflect the emphasis on the coral as well as the fish. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:38, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The composition is beautiful and the focus does not bother me. I had no idea before that some fishes might have long-term loyalty to their mate. Shouldn't smaller fish species be identified in the description and categories? -- IamMM (talk) 06:42, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IamMM, Ikan Kekek: I've added in the description page the ids of the other 2 fish species on the picture and also 2 coral species I could easily id. I can figure out the ids of at least 2 more coral species depicted here that I'll add later (I've documented those ids but I cannot access that source right now), Poco a poco (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --XRay 💬 11:36, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful photo. Cmao20 (talk) 12:11, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:49, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and IamMM. --Aristeas (talk) 14:50, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 16:41, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 17:05, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The two big fish accentuate the background. Looks like what you'd see in an aquarium but can never photograph well. Daniel Case (talk) 19:52, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:04, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:44, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:51, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 07:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:07, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:The Heart Nebula with Melotte 15.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2022 at 11:36:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Astronomy#Nebulae
Info created by MessierX - uploaded by MessierX - nominated by MessierX -- MessierX (talk) 11:36, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- MessierX (talk) 11:36, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice but very small. What's with all the categories at the bottom of this nomination? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:35, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral I think this is a very good example of amateur astrophotography and the resolution does not bother me because we should be more forgiving of excelent amateur work in this genre compared to Hubble photos that are not unique to Commons. But I am not sure it is as good as this FP which I nominated in January, and I am not sure there needs to be another FP of the same nebula unless it adds something clearly new. Cmao20 (talk) 12:14, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 19:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:07, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:A small tortoiseshell butterfly pollinating a Glebionis coronaria,or Crown Daisy flower in Darjeeling, India (1 of 3 image series)).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2022 at 18:30:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info - A single shot of a small tortoise shell butterfly pollinating a Crown Daisy flower in Darjeeling, India
Info All by -- Subhrajyoti07 talk 18:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Subhrajyoti07 talk 18:30, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty, but I don't think this is sharp enough for FP, and I also don't think the flowers on the left and empty space on the right are ideal compositionally. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:47, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment @Ikan This being a macro lens has shallower DoF than a "normal" lens and the photo taken at f/13, a very sharp setting. The main subject that is the butterfly is very sharp. I can see the individual hair, pollen spots etc at 100% magnification. So I am a bit surprised on the sharpness feedback-Subhrajyoti07 talk 19:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Look at your competition, the butterfly photos that have recently been promoted to FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:34, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I do think the sharpness is a little on the low side but it gets over the line for me. Cmao20 (talk) 20:37, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 04:46, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Definitely sharper than our FP File:Kleiner Fuchs, Aglais urticae.JPG at comparable pixel count, but this one here is rather noisy. --Kreuz schnabel 15:39, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Selective denoising applied Subhrajyoti07 talk 09:41, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Background is too distracting for me. Daniel Case (talk) 18:20, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp head, cluttered composition. Might possibly pass at QI. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:41, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Your signature, Subhrajyoti07, red with black background is very difficult to read -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Ya changed to defaultSubhrajyoti07 (talk) 13:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 23:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Coral (Acropora hemprichii), Ras Katy, Sharm el-Sheij, Egipto, 2022-03-26, DD, DD 108.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 May 2022 at 17:14:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Anthozoa
Info Acropora hemprichii, Ras Katy, Sharm el-Sheikh, Red Sea, Egypt. This species of acroporid coral is found in shallow reefs in marine environments, occurs at depths of 3 to 15 m (9.8 to 49.2 ft), and lives for between 13 and 24 years. The species is listed as vulnerable on the IUCN Red List, and has a decreasing population. It's found in colonies of densely-packed branches, which are flat or upward-facing, are often more than 2 m (6.6 ft) wide, and can exist without the presence of any other species. Acropora hemprichii is common but only found in a small area; the Gulf of Aden, the Red Sea, the Philippines, and the Indian Ocean. The guy in the top right corner is a blackside hawkfish (Paracirrhites forsteri) and the two guys hidding in the coral are yellow chromis (Chromis analis). c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:14, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I wish the little fish were sharper, but I suppose this is an FP because of the composition and the sharpness of the coral. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:49, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:28, 25 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 04:47, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 09:14, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't know if the composition is FP worthy. The subject is only centered after all. No real effort seems to have been done to get an original point of view. The focus is also on the back part of the coral and on the "ground" in front of the it. And finally for me, the main subject is hard to tell apart from its environment. Whether this is a feature or not, I don't discuss. But that does take a toll on the attractiveness of the photo. Good QI? Yes. FP? Not in my opinion. - Benh (talk) 16:50, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 451128 09:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Benh. Daniel Case (talk) 03:13, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:32, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 12:18, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:41, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals#Class_:_Anthozoa

File:Chinese Fishing Net Raising Birds Sunrise Ashtamudi Kollam Mar22 A7C 01784.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2022 at 10:13:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#India
Info created and uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:13, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting scenery in pleasant lighting mood. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:48, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ezarateesteban 18:57, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tagooty, there are two big dust spots near the upper left corner. Please eliminate them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:00, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Ikan Kekek: Thanks for pointing this out. --Tagooty (talk) 07:11, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sure thing! I like this photo but haven't yet decided whether I consider it an FP or not. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:07, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks @IamMM: for nominating this image. One of my favourite artistic images. --Tagooty (talk) 07:11, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin; very nice golden colours. --Aristeas (talk) 08:03, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:53, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452371 09:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support another subscriber to to Radomianin's summary --Virtual-Pano (talk) 15:30, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:31, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:42, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:27, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --SHB2000 (talk) 10:34, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose Great mood but ... while it is undoubtedly a QI, the background is a little too unbalanced and cluttered for me to support it as an FP. Daniel Case (talk) 19:45, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd have cloned out some birds (specially close to the frame at left and top) but overall a nice subject and lighting Poco a poco (talk) 10:09, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Poco a poco: Thank you. I've cloned two birds that were close to the frame edges (left and top). Removed a couple of specks in the sky. --Tagooty (talk) 02:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you, Tagooty; this change has made the photo even better. --Aristeas (talk) 06:32, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Hulged (talk) 12:52, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Industry#India

File:American robin squeaking (30126).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 15:18:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Turdidae_(Thrushes)
Info An American robin (Turdus migratorius) making an alarm call. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:18, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:18, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good take; Imho, a photo with open beak has more educational value. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:04, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 18:28, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:52, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:57, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:41, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:56, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captured at the right moment. --Tagooty (talk) 15:59, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Robins are common but beautiful. Nice composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:35, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the background just as much ... perfect spring abstraction. Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral The background is not really harmonic IMHO and the detail of the legs is poor, otherwise very nice capture Poco a poco (talk) 19:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Turdidae_(Thrushes)

File:Kyffhäuser-Denkmal mit Kaiser Wilhelm I. 20210914 HOF05695.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 May 2022 at 18:59:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Germany
Info Part of Kyffhäuser memorial with Kaiser Wilhelm I. memorial, created/uploaded/nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 18:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 18:59, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I prefer the composition of File:Kyffhäuserdenkmal 20210914 HOF05972 RAW-Export 20220415002107corr Kopie.jpg, except that there might be issues with the random placements of some people in it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:21, 26 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Thank you for the hint! I was able to process one image, it is now in the "Alternative image" section :). --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like this one, too; it brings out the central part of the monument very impressively. (Personally I dislike this nationalistic, pathetic, boastful kind of architecture – but I appreciate good photographs of it ;–). The other perspective mentionend by Ikan is very good, too, but IMHO the two views are so different that you could nominate both of them. --Aristeas (talk) 08:17, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Princess Rosalina 💄 452842 09:15, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support lots of detail to explore --Virtual-Pano (talk) 15:25, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 20:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh light, disturbing people. --Basotxerri (talk) 08:15, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very good photo of the monument, but the sky isn't doing anything for me. This is a high-level criticism, but it's because FPs are meant to be the very greatest photos on the site, and for that, I think the composition has to hit me more. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:23, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Daniel Case (talk) 03:49, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative image

Info The Kyffhäuser memorial with the platform and the tower with Kaiser Wilhelm I., created/uploaded/nominated by PantheraLeo1359531 -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 14:37, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Two things: I think this is really too different to be an alternate. But you really felt the need to eliminate every person from the picture? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Info Sorry, I thought this was desired :D, but anyway I prefer the image of the tower itself :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 19:25, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Inadequate illumination on the facade. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 02:40, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per King of Hearts. --SHB2000 (talk) 10:33, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The other one is a lot better Cmao20 (talk) 15:24, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I neither like the light nor the bottom up perspective --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:49, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:57, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Monuments and memorials

The chosen alternative is: File:Kyffhäuser-Denkmal mit Kaiser Wilhelm I. 20210914 HOF05695.jpg

File:Рожевий ранок в Ґорґанах.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 19:08:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
Info Translated, the file name means something like Pink Morning in the Gorgany Mountains which is a range and nature reserve in the southwestern part of Ukraine.
Created and uploaded by Vitalii Bashkatov (talk) - nominated by -- Radomianin (talk) 19:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support At the first glance I thought the colors were exaggerated, but on closer analysis the tint of the snow seems realistic. I think the colors, as well as the sky, are natural: just a winter morning. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very atmospheric, good sharpness. I agree that the colours seem to be consistent and realistic. --Aristeas (talk) 20:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It's a tiny bit noisy but I prefer a fine grain to too much noise reduction. Composition and colours are great. Cmao20 (talk) 21:02, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:28, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:57, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:13, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I really cannot deny this a vote. The sky seems to shimmer even in a still image, there's a kind of fairy tale hill with a perfectly placed strip of mist, and a big, beautiful Christmas tree on the right. I might prefer if there had been a similarly tall tree on the left, too, but there are so many elements (and I didn't mention all of them) that make this a worthwhile composition. I'll mention two more: the horizontal striations in the sky and in the snow in the foreground and the paths that curve around but mostly move the eyes forward up the hill. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:34, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:26, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:09, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow!--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:01, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:55, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:59, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Kinner Kailash Mountain Range (edited).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 6 May 2022 at 00:59:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info created and uploaded by Anubhav Agarwal - nominated by UnpetitproleX -- UnpetitproleX (talk) 00:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (talk) 00:59, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It’s a good idea to create a version of this beautiful photo without the labels on the mountains. However something went wrong while editing the photo: the sky now shows some posterization which is not present in the original photo. It should be possible to remove the labels without generating posterization. --Aristeas (talk) 08:32, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Done Thanks! I had made several edits apart from removing the labels, including removing CAs (so many af them were hiding in different parts of the image, thus did this several times) some colour correction etc. The posterization must’ve crept in, I’ve edited the original and made all edits at once to that, please let me know if this one is satisfactory. UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:56, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you, UnpetitproleX! The sky is much better now. --Aristeas (talk) 13:57, 27 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Why mountains are always beautiful :-) --SHB2000 (talk) 10:32, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

* Oppose Very picturesque, and it would probably fully satisfy me if there were some strategically placed clouds above the mountains. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:20, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I hestiated a bit because the buildings in the foreground are a bit soft. But this can be explained by the need for strong noise reduction which was caused by the shadow on that area. Yes, the cloudless morning sky looks almost too grand to be real. But why shouldn’t the sunrise over the holy mountain Kinnaur Kailash, traditionally believed to be Shiva’s winter residence ([1]), be perfectly clear and serene? ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 07:28, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Good argument. On that basis, I've crossed out my opposing vote. Although one could argue that with Shiva being the Destroyer, a more dramatic sky with swirling clouds could be good. :-) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:31, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yes, of course, a dramatic stormy sky would be very appropriate, too ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Hulged (talk) 12:56, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Very nice photo but image quality maybe a little on the low side Cmao20 (talk) 13:03, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose A sky that colorful doesn't need clouds IMO, but, alas, too much of the image is unsharp and yet the ridgeline itself looks oversharpened. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It seems, with insufficient support, this nom is headed towards a non-feature. Though I am glad that at least the picture could be improved as a result of the nom. Thanks to all voters. --UnpetitproleX (talk) 13:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 06:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Haltern am See, Westruper Heide -- 2021 -- 4714-8.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 08:24:44 (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 💬 08:24, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- XRay 💬 08:24, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Atmospheric in a poetic sense; good quality. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not that sharp everywhere, but the amazing mood overrides that. Cmao20 (talk) 21:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 06:33, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 15:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:47, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:11, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Idol of goddess Kali kept near Nimtala ghat for Visarjan or Immersion in the waters of river Hooghly.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 20:45:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Figurines and statuettes
Info- Kali is a Hindu goddess who is considered to be the master of death, time and change. As per Hindu mythology she destroys the evil in order to protect the innocent. Idol of goddess kept near a river bank for "Visarjan" or Immersion in the water as the "Puja" or ritual worship has already been performed.
Info All by-- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 20:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 20:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment As you know, I like this picture, but I just found a small dust spot directly to the left of the face. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Corrected. Thanks - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 07:17, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question what is the copyright status of this sculpture? Please add an appropriate copyright tag, ideally using the whole {{Art photo}} instead of {{Information}}. Is it permanently located in a public place? Then {{FoP-India}} would probably be the best choice. --El Grafo (talk) 09:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - As per Yann. This being part of Hindu mythology/folklore there is no copyright associated with it. These are temporary sculptures, created from clay and post worship are immersed in Pond/River water. This happens every year across countless locations in India. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 11:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the reply! After that plus a quick web search for folklore India copyright, I'm convinced that we're probably OK to keep this. Interesting topic, though, and there are some voices out there suggesting to adjust copyright laws to "protect" Indian folklore. Something we might want to keep an eye on ... Some further reading: [2], [3] --El Grafo (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is folklore, so I don't think there is a copyright on this sculpture. --Yann (talk) 09:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 15:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 05:07, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have taken the liberty to propose another gallery link. IMHO this is a sculpture, and it fits well into the “Figurines and statuettes” section. --Aristeas (talk) 09:21, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you Aristeas. I think this is more appropriate - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 09:24, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Oops – I thought I had already voted for this one. --Aristeas (talk) 07:00, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:10, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Figurines and statuettes

File:Magna Lykseth in Tristan och Isolde at Kungliga Operan 1909 - SMV - GL164.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 20:03:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#Musicians_and_singers_performing
Info created by Atelier Jaeger - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 20:03, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A common criticism on these boards would be that the focus is on her costume, not her face, but this is a great photograph from 1909. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Aye. I doubt me the printing technology was good enough to even really notice at the time. With the printing paper of the time not being particularly fine grained - these are scans of negatives - do you think you could, practically speaking, ever have seen this image at greater than an effective - let's be generous - 1000px wide before the modern day? Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 14:57, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:32, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 03:38, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:00, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 21:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:46, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:51, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 10:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sharpness leaves something to be desired, but ... it's over a century old. Daniel Case (talk) 03:26, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:03, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mandli caricatures ziplei a Urtijëi.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 13:52:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Figurines and statuettes
Info created & uploaded by Moroder - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 13:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 13:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 15:05, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:20, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:54, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question what's the copyright status of the sculptures? It seems the sculptor ~~is still alive - did she agree for this derivative work of her sculptures to be published under the specified license? If so, that should be documented via COM:VRT like usual.~~ died in 1984. So we'd need something like a COM:VRT permission from the heirs. --El Grafo (talk) 09:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I contacted the heirs for the release of the appropriate permissions --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 18:09, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thanks! I'll add my Support, let's hope they'll approve. El Grafo (talk) 07:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:46, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:50, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:02, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Figurines and statuettes

File:Mangos - single and halved.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 14:51:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 14:51, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 15:02, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Mouth-watering! --Tagooty (talk) 15:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 16:30, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Tagooty. --Aristeas (talk) 18:51, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another part of this impressive series! What will you present next? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:19, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:34, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (talk) 01:01, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The stone is not visible, which could provide a wrong impression, no? --A.Savin 02:24, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this compo shows how the inner flesh looks like, it doesn't have to include the stone. --Ivar (talk) 09:43, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support And it is not a peach or whatever, that you can easily isolate the stone... Nice image. -- -donald- (talk) 05:08, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:23, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 21:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:52, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It may have been tricky to balance these two slices of mango -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:49, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:03, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:03, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)

File:Renfe Viajeros class 100 Narbonne - Port-la-Nouvelle.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 14:53:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 14:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 14:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:55, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:15, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:52, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support More of a striking landscape with a train in it than a train photo. Daniel Case (talk) 17:14, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Very nice compo and scenery but the sharpness of the train is not as good as we are used to Poco a poco (talk) 20:02, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:44, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 02:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:Mount Machhapuchhre-4589.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2022 at 05:51:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural#Nepal
Info created by Bijay Chaurasia - uploaded by Bijay Chaurasia - nominated by Bijay Chaurasia -- Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 05:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bijay Chaurasia (talk) 05:51, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe I'm missing something, but my reaction is that most of this is too dark and lacking in details. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too much darkness. --Milseburg (talk) 14:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not very special in my view. Dark, and vignetting in the corners -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with others, this one is dark and somewhat ordinary. Aslo, completely unrelated but I like many of your pictures. Was even considering nominating this one here myself (might still do on WP:FP). Also, this picture is very nice, do consider nominating it (I'm sure many disagree with me on this, but I like it). And this one is also great, though I see it was already nominated and missed out by one vote. Many others too that I like. And apologies for going on a tangent like this and using this space for something it isn't meant for! --UnpetitproleX (talk) 12:17, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Beautiful pic and I like the clouds round the peaks, but not quite FP to me - too dark and not a clear composition, per above. Cmao20 (talk) 23:32, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Gone over to the dark side. Daniel Case (talk) 03:28, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:10, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Daslook. Allium ursinum, zwellende bloemknop. 18-04-2022 (actm.) 02.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2022 at 15:37:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae
Info Swelling flower bud of Allium ursinum. Focus stack of 66 photos.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:00, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (talk) 21:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:32, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:04, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice, it’s great to see how the flower is folded into that small blossom. --Aristeas (talk) 09:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:45, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:49, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support looks tasty! --El Grafo (talk) 14:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great subject Poco a poco (talk) 20:15, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:33, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A teeny little bit of ringing at the very top of the flower, and if it could be fixed that would be great. But it doesn't have to be. Daniel Case (talk) 16:15, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:07, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:02, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lotje (talk) 21:09, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae

File:Grey heron 2022 04 03 03.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2022 at 13:29:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea
Info A grey heron (Ardea cinerea), all by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 13:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support We have several FPs of herons, but this is a nice photo and deserves a star. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --A.Savin 16:53, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Ikan. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:33, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good subject/background separation. --Aristeas (talk) 09:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:39, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:46, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:49, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:15, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:16, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:33, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:06, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea

File:Hohenloher Freilandmuseum - Baugruppe Mühlental - Mahlmühle aus Weipertshofen - Flur - blaue Wand mit Feuerlöscher (2).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 7 May 2022 at 15:57:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Containers
Info A modern red fire extinguisher on a bright blue wall in the historical gristmill from Weipertshofen, Hohenlohe Open-air Museum near Schwäbisch Hall, Germany. The complete hallway of that mill is painted blue. In the 19th century, the invention of synthetic ultramarine made blue wall paints affordable for the first time. Some people were so excited about that new colour that they painted complete houses (example) or complete rooms with it :–). All by me, --Aristeas (talk) 15:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I was fascinated by the contrast between the vivid red of the fire extinguisher and the bright blue of the wall. And I like the lines – the beams of the timber framing are (more or less) rectangular, but the single diagonal beam and the diagonal shadows cross them, adding some dynamics to the image. Thanks to Cart for suggesting to nominate this photo :–). --Aristeas (talk) 15:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Two issues for me: (1) the electric switch and socket, (2) the extinguisher is slightly off centre. Both can easily be fixed by a slight crop as suggested. --Kreuz schnabel 17:41, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I am afraid I would have to oppose a cropped version as it would be clearly worse than this one. The switch is great because it provides something else to look at. Cmao20 (talk) 13:05, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thank you for your interesting suggestion, Kreuz. Since last night I have been thinking about whether to propose such a crop as an alternative. I have been hesitant so far, as alternatives always make voting a bit more complex. Several users have given reasons for keeping the switch in the picture; for me, the graphic structure of the lines is another reason – the cable emphasizes the right-angled structure of the timber framing, so that the diagonal beam and the light/shadow strips contrast more strongly with it. Therefore I am foregoing an alternative (for now). Best, --Aristeas (talk) 14:57, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support As it is --Kritzolina (talk) 19:22, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well-balanced composition with pleasant near-complementary contrast and interesting lighting situation. Taking the hose into account, the extinguisher is almost centered. In my humble opinion, the lead room on the left is okay to direct the viewer to the antique rotary switch and socket, which are an asset to the overall composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Nice that you understand the three tech eras represented in photo (wall, switch, extinguisher). --Cart (talk) 20:03, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --A.Savin 20:57, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:46, 28 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very good, but no exceptional composition to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:18, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Toller Farbkontrast, prima gesehen und in Szene gesetzt. Die elektrische Leitung steht symbolisch für die Brandgefahr im Fachwerkhaus. Außerdem: ich kann von Minimalismus in der Fotografie ehrlich gesagt nie genug bekommen. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:37, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per above! --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:40, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank Schulenburg -- IamMM (talk) 08:19, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:57, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding colours, light and composition Cmao20 (talk) 13:03, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see here any reason, for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 13:20, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I am not surprised at all to see Cart's name invoked. I actually thought this one was hers; it's exactly the sort of thing she'd find the beauty in. I like the way the light rays cross the half-timber at right angles, and in closeup the stucco wall texture is great (also interesting that it's blue, a color one rarely sees stucco painted). Daniel Case (talk)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Simple, but impressive. --XRay 💬 11:38, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:48, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:31, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 00:36, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Image:National Park Tortuguero (Costa Rica).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 12:04:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: [[Commons:Featured pictures/<add the gallery here>]]
Info created by Francisco Peralta Torrejón - uploaded by Francisco Peralta Torrejón - nominated by Francisco Peralta Torrejón -- Francisco Peralta Torrejón (talk) 12:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral -- Francisco Peralta Torrejón (talk) 12:04, 7 May 2022 (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: Black and white image, quite small for this subject, wrong orientation (should be landscape format). This is not going to pass. Also missing link to FP gallery. You should first try at COM:QIC. Yann (talk) 12:44, 7 May 2022 (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:Crested hawk-eagle (Nisaetus cirrhatus ceylanensis) feeding on egret.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2022 at 11:45:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Nisaetus
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:45, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:41, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 21:02, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:46, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:10, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 05:27, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:58, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:10, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support His face looks like he's about to belch. Daniel Case (talk) 17:59, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Nisaetus

File:Eastern span of the San Francisco Oakland Bay Bridge at night dllu.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2022 at 06:58:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#United States of America
Info created by dllu - uploaded by dllu - nominated by Dllu -- dllu (t,c) 06:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It would go nicely with my Western span -- dllu (t,c) 06:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:11, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:07, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The bridge and the light strips form a very elegant curve. --Aristeas (talk) 08:33, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:57, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 13:00, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas, good composition. Cmao20 (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:20, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technical issues: Serious ringing on the lights and some of the other ancillary structures on the bridge—the back of the road sign near the bottom of the image looks more like CGI. The taillight trails are pixillated. Overall the subdued color looks unnatural, especially compared to the other view. We've seen long exposures like this (cf. Frank's similar FP, with the old bridge still in place, handled much better. Daniel Case (talk) 02:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm I can probably reprocess the picture to try to eliminate the ringing artifacts. Perhaps it was oversharpened. The taillight trails are not pixellated. Some modern cars have LED tail lights that blink at a really high frequency, causing the artifacts [4] [5]. dllu (t,c) 04:11, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 10:09, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 11:37, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 16:42, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:31, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:50, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:29, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support —Bruce1ee^talk 06:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Bridges#United States of America

File:Malabar pied hornbill (Anthracoceros coronatus) female in flight.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2022 at 11:49:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Bucerotidae (Hornbills)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:49, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Good but very small. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:18, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Ikan -- IamMM (talk) 08:37, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 09:04, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 16:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Shagil Kannur (talk) 05:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:00, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tagooty (talk) 01:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:10, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:43, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Bucerotidae (Hornbills)

File:View of Empire State Building from Rockefeller Center New York City dllu.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 8 May 2022 at 06:51:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United States
Info created by dllu - uploaded by dllu - nominated by Dllu -- dllu (t,c) 06:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support it is a common view, but at least my camera is better than average -- dllu (t,c) 06:51, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, that camera is excellent (congrats to the GFX 50R!), but the photographer is excellent, too ;–). I really like the fact that you have restricted yourself to a narrower angle of view – usually with photos like this people want to include as much as possible in the picture (example), but your composition is much more concentrated and expressive. --Aristeas (talk) 08:30, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment After browsing our FP gallery pages I have taken the liberty to propose another gallery link: IMHO this fits better into our “cityscapes” gallery. I hope this is OK, else just revert my edit. --Aristeas (talk) 08:39, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks! I have another one that has an even narrower angle of view --- focusing on the One World Trade Center in the background! dllu (t,c) 20:41, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:02, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 09:10, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 12:59, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lots of nice colours Cmao20 (talk) 13:06, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ermell (talk) 20:21, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Maybe being a New Yorker has something to do with my reaction, but while this is certainly a nice shot and one I'd be delighted to take (my iPhone 11 isn't capable of that good a shot), it does not overwhelm me in terms of composition or sharpness. You don't even have to compare this to the fantastic panoramas by King of Hearts; compare File:NYC Top of the Rock Pano.jpg. The technical quality of that shot is not as good as this one, because it's from 2005, but I would submit that the composition is more pleasing. Clearly, there is room for disagreement about that, but this is my take. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Well, some people like wider shots and some people like narrower shots, and I totally understand and respect your opinion. I recall you had similar feedback for Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Francisco City Hall as seen from 100 Van Ness at dusk.jpg. Personally, I find that super wide panoramas are a little boring as they simply capture everything instead of allowing the photographer to think about what to focus on. The part of the observation deck in frame on the right in File:NYC Top of the Rock Pano.jpg is annoying. Regarding "it does not overwhelm me in terms of [...] sharpness", it is surprising to hear, but I suspect it is due to atmospheric reasons. At any rate, this photo is 50 megapixels so viewing it at a reasonable size (say, 1 meter across) is quite sharp to my eyes, and vastly more so than viewing most other FPs at that size. dllu (t,c) 21:53, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I understand and respect your opinion, too. I do agree that the panorama I linked would be improved by not including part of the observation deck. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 29 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support A shot including just the Manhattan skyline, really, is fine. I wonder if there was any reason the Empire State was lit up in all green that day? It couldn't have been for the Jets ... Daniel Case (talk) 02:07, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment According to the Tower Light Calendar it was In Honor of Climate Week NYC. Tower Light Calendar 2021 09. dllu (t,c) 04:20, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 09:16, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 11:37, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 16:43, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:29, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:49, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 06:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think it's a common view too, and as it is, it's lacking a bit of saturation and has a green colour cast. I would also add a slight perspective correction on the "horizontal" lines. As a side note, a bigger camera brings practically no benefit for such pictures - Benh (talk) 15:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Closeup of match stick heads.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2022 at 07:58:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info 61 images taken on focus rail to get the tips of the match stick in sharp focus. All by Subhrajyoti07 -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 07:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 07:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A good try but the arrangement is rather contrived and the worst possible angle with which to get the subject in focus. The stacking has errors, halos and swirling distortions so if the purpose is educational detail of the head, then it hasn't really succeeded. Compare the more straightforward File:Zapalky makrofoto.jpg which clearly shows two kinds of head without any doubt over whether one is seeing reality. And of course there are plenty artistic possibilities for matches when lit (File:Streichholz.jpg and File:Match Ignition 01.jpg). -- Colin (talk) 09:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I see your point also I agree that though these setup was done from a composition point of view (diagonal lines converging to center) but from a focus point of view this is not the right angle. A straight forward shot would have been better. I would like to withdraw this nomination of mine. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 10:55, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 10:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Mariquita asiática multicolor (Harmonia axyridis), Hartelholz, Múnich, Alemania, 2020-07-12, DD 76-112 FS.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2022 at 19:48:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Coccinellidae_(Ladybugs)
Info Stacked macro shot merged from 37 frames of an Asian ladybeetle (Harmonia axyridis), Hartelholz, Munich, Germany. Also known as harlequin or multicoloured Asian, it's a large coccinellid beetle. This is one of the most variable species in the world, with an exceptionally wide range of colour forms. It is native to eastern Asia, but has been artificially introduced to North America and Europe to control aphids and scale insects. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

* Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The points about this being a dead specimen already undergoing decay are giving me pause. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support-- Shagil Kannur (talk) 05:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

* Support Nice work, though this large ladybird is displacing UK species. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:29, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Stupidly, I had not noticed this is dead. Where are the legs?!! I don't like it. Your image will mislead many others, not just someone like me who has done many macros of the species. We should not be offering pictures of dead animals like this at FP. Why do it? When used elsewhere, the statement on the file page that this is dead will be lost. Also, if decay is showing as suggested below, you should withdraw the nomination @Poco a poco: . In any event, the file name should mention that it is dead. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp: We have dozens of dead speciments with the FP star, are there any rules about that?. The suggestion above that the decay process is

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:10, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:52, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The head of beetle is not sharp enough, IHMO. -- Karelj (talk) 11:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 19:00, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Technical shortcomings per Karej. Also the edges of the beetle looking sort of unusual. Daniel Case (talk) 03:20, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose decay process of a dead specimen already started, big spot in the top middle. --Ivar (talk) 06:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Sharp enough when downsampled to 4000px across Cmao20 (talk) 07:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I will not for this nom but I don't feel getting fair reviews here:

Ivar: would you mind showing me evidence of a decay process? I know how and where that would be noticeable and I don't see that here, so please, help me with that. FYI Ikan Kekek

Ikan Kekek note added. Please compare this with other photos of living ladybeetles. --Ivar (talk) 17:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp: we have dozens of dead specimens with the FP star. Can you please, explain me how to get this DoF and level of detail of an alive animal. As you have so much experience with macros of this kind of subjects, you may enlight me.

Do we have FP images of animals posed to look as if they are alive Poco a poco? I hope not, though I've not bothered to go through your FPs. Naturally we have FPs of specimens. These are different and valuable. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:40, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand your comment, Charlesjsharp. If I put a needle on the animal so that it's clearly dead, it's then FP-worthy, that makes no sense to me. Anyhow I'll then rather photograph seeds or stones to spare this kind of discussions. Will also specify to my fossil shots that those animals are dead to clear any room of doubt. --Poco a poco (talk) 17:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

You don't understand? Strange. Your image made me (and others) think it was a photo of a live animal. You've done this many times before at QI (can't remember if at FP too) and I have asked you not to. Specimen is the word we use to describe a collected dead animal. These are conventionally photographed on a plain background as with all the FPs I have looked at. Dorsal and ventral images are typically used. You asked 'Can you please, explain me how to get this DoF and level of detail of an alive animal'. Focus-bracketed shots of live insects are common at FP. A steady hand, monopod or tripod can be combined with a camera set-up that allows automatic focus-bracketing, like my Canon R6. I used to use the FB Tube. Helicon Focus software automatically aligns images to compensate for small amounts of movement between shots. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:10, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charlesjsharp, I know the principles and indeed I've the hardware and software you talk about (even a motorized slider). I cannot get this detail with a 100 mm or 300 mm macro lens. To achieve that you need to get very close using a special lens like this one that can magnify x5, apart from the flash or lighting. Anyhow, cero motivation to do any macro stuff in the near future --Poco a poco (talk) 18:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Poco a poco (talk) 17:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 17:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Майдан у вогнях.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 09:56:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Ukraine
Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 09:56, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 09:56, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:17, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Classic late blue hour/early night shot. Today people mostly use wide-angle lenses for this kind of photo, but Moahim has used the classic short telephoto perspective which compresses and intensifies lights and nightlive. --Aristeas (talk) 15:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose IMO too busy compo and arbitrary crop. --A.Savin 16:34, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not huge, but it's from 2014. Quite pleasing to me, and the busyness of the scene is part of the point of the photo to me. The crop makes sense to me, too: We have three buildings in the foreground. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:45, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and Ikan. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:17, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:37, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A. Savin. Daniel Case (talk) 17:54, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per A. Savin. -- Karelj (talk) 14:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same opinion, sorry, Poco a poco (talk) 19:56, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:55, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:2017 - Київ - Місячний ранок над Поштовою площею.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 09:55:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Ukraine
Info created by Moahim - uploaded by Moahim - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 09:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 09:55, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Serene composition and beautiful pastel colours Cmao20 (talk) 12:17, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 14:52, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. Imho, the scenery has a painting-like impression. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:17, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose Serene, but not very sharp and not huge for an urban panorama to compensate. I have to base my vote on the point that this is not one of the very best photos on the site, even though I like it a lot in every other way. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:48, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just doesn't stand out. Daniel Case (talk) 04:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the colors and the mood - this might not be technically perfect, but it has a lot of artistic value --Kritzolina (talk) 08:08, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 07:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good image, but not enough for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 16:10, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Grey heron at sunset. Eriyadu, Maldives.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 07:39:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes
Info created - uploaded - nominated by me. -- Ввласенко (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ввласенко (talk) 07:39, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice and I applaud the choice to have plenty of space on the left rather than to crop more tightly, much more interesting. Cmao20 (talk) 12:16, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I miss the wow here. There are already a number of better FPs of this species.--Ermell (talk) 21:06, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 04:07, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:36, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:53, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Ermell --Tagooty (talk) 16:02, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell. -- Karelj (talk) 10:56, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree, too. This is a type of bird for which we have many good photographs, so the competition for a feature is tougher than it is for some other birds. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:56, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 5 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Village Havre-aux-Maisons, Iles des la Madeleine, Canada.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 05:31:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Canada
Info created by Marc-Lautenbacher - uploaded by Marc-Lautenbacher - nominated by Marc-Lautenbacher -- Marc-Lautenbacher (talk) 05:31, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Marc-Lautenbacher (talk) 05:31, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery link fixed. These gallery links are rather stupid: they must just point to an already existing section on some of our FP gallery pages. Your friendly gallery link service ;–) --Aristeas (talk) 08:09, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Light an sky are too dull for FP. Right crop is rather tight. --Milseburg (talk) 09:10, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose composition and light are not exceptional Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 09:18, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think this is a good photo and I don't mind the light but the right crop and the bottom crop are crying out for more space. Cmao20 (talk) 12:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --S. DÉNIEL (talk) 17:35, 30 April 2022 (UTC)--[reply]
Oppose per Milseburg and Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 20:56, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I have no problem with the light but would like somewhat more generous crops on the right and bottom, as others have mentioned. Sharpness is not quite pinpoint, which I think is down to the mistiness of the day. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:39, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 16:17, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 3 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 13:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Small, blocky shapes of towns, fields, and pastures surround the graceful swirls and whorls of the Mississippi River. Original from NASA. Digitally enhanced by rawpixel.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 06:11:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Meanders of the Mississippi River

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Satellite images#North America
Info created by NASA - digitally enhanced by rawpixel - uploaded by Eyes Roger - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 06:11, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:11, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose The original NASA version has better details. -- IamMM (talk) 17:17, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautiful, informative and interesting --Kritzolina (talk) 07:00, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ per Kritzolina. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:08, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ Unusually beautiful Landsat image. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:38, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Sorry for any confusion; vote pulled in favor of the original. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:36, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose in favor of original, as votes aren't changing from this version to the original fast enough. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:49, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~Support~~ per Ikan Cmao20 (talk) 12:15, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Works also as an abstract artwork. --Aristeas (talk) 14:51, 30 April 2022 (UTC) In doubt I prefer the original version, see “Alterantive”. --Aristeas (talk) 09:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:57, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:01, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:34, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:43, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:52, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:28, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question IamMM, can we please have the NASA original as an alternate? It's much bigger, and I would favor it. If there isn't time, I think we should do a remove and replace nomination of the original. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:06, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Ikan Kekek: I put the original version of NASA as alternative. @Kritzolina, Radomianin, Cmao20, Aristeas, Daniel Case, Ermell, Agnes Monkelbaan, Schnobby, Llez, and Johann Jaritz: Please comment on quick remove and replace the new version. -- IamMM (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Ikan Kekek --Poco a poco (talk) 16:55, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Original is better. Yann (talk) 18:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I favor this, as I mentioned above. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:35, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you, Ikan, for drawing our attention to the original file. Of course at the first glance I can’t discover much additional information in this file – it has got more pixels but they are less sharp. But on the other hand I also can’t see what “digitally enhanced by rawpixel” has enhanced in the other version (besides downscaling it and increasing the contrast a bit). Because both versions are more or less equivalent for me, I think we should feature the original (this one). --Aristeas (talk) 09:10, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment They are equally sharp at the same size, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support OK for me. (I've striked out my support above.) -- Radomianin (talk) 11:35, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Andrei (talk) 09:05, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 06:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:53, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Satellite images#North America

The chosen alternative is: File:Meandering Mississippi (5182095595).jpg

File:American coot in Prospect Park (06152).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 13:40:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Rallidae_(Coots,_Rails_and_Crakes)
Info American coot (Fulica americana), an odd little chicken-like water bird. It hangs out with ducks, but it's more closely related to rails/cranes (its toes are lobed, not webbed, for example). That bright white bill on dark black feathers has made this one challenging to get a good level of detail -- I got lucky with some good light and a bird that gave me a good 10 seconds to fix my settings before getting back in the water). all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:40, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:40, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 20:52, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:57, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:14, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:55, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose A very good photo but I can't avoid being distracted by that wood or rock at left. Daniel Case (talk) 17:56, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- It is indeed part of the log/branch it's standing on. And I'm thankful for it, because it combined the perks of being on land (visibility of the legs/feet) with the water (cleaner background .... except for the log itself :) ). — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Deserving to me, nice details. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:44, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:16, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great detail Poco a poco (talk) 19:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, the eye of course, but particularly the feet. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:46, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Rallidae_(Coots,_Rails_and_Crakes)

File:Benjakitti Forest Park (I).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 20:49:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Thailand
Info I love the subtle colours and placid, painterly composition in this photo. created by Supanut Arunoprayote - uploaded by Supanut Arunoprayote - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:49, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 20:49, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice contrast between the modernist architecture in the background and the (artificial) nature in the foreground. --Aristeas (talk) 06:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:45, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--UnpetitproleX (talk) 08:05, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:58, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 14:13, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I enjoy looking at this photo and agree with Aristeas' points, but what makes it less than great to me is that it kind of gets in its own way because, for example, a couple of trees in the middle block some important parts of the view of the buildings. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:28, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support One of those 21st-century views that really does look like the cover art of '70s-era sci-fi. I take Ikan's point about the trees, but it's a tradeoff: without those trees the foreground is less impressive. Daniel Case (talk) 18:25, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:05, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:57, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:54, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:49, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Close wing mud-puddling position of Charaxes bharata (C.& R. Felder,1867) - Indian Nawab.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 9 May 2022 at 16:24:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info created by Atanu Bose Photography - uploaded by Atanu Bose Photography - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:24, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not the sharpest butterfly pic but the composition makes up for it. Cmao20 (talk) 20:53, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, and the beauty of the butterflies. And it's sharp enough, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:07, 30 April 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:40, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan --Kritzolina (talk) 08:06, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 12:57, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Striking composition --Tagooty (talk) 15:57, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:38, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:27, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:40, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Very beautiful and delicate - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 13:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 14:59, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:58, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry for going agains the stream, but IMHO the key area that should be sharp in this kind of photography are the eyes and they are blurry Poco a poco (talk) 20:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes the eyes are out of focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Agreed, guys, not the sharpest, but this again wins my support for compositional reasons and beauty. If you're able to photograph the same kind of composition with more sharpness, we might be able to consider a remove and replace someday, but I think this deserves the star now. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:19, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 23:49, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)

File:Dagestan-015.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 12:21:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#North Caucasian Federal District
Info created by Alexander Novikov - uploaded by Alexander Novikov - nominated by Alexander Novikov -- Alexander Novikov (talk) 12:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Alexander Novikov (talk) 12:21, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice simple composition Cmao20 (talk) 21:25, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Delicate colours, nice composition, open for many allegorical meanings of your choice ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:56, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose lacking detail unfortunately. Tomer T (talk) 12:18, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 14:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Tomer, plus I don't like the crop at the right. --A.Savin 16:50, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The tree makes it stand out for me. Daniel Case (talk) 18:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452815 08:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 14:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Russia#North Caucasian Federal District

File:Navy Yard, Brooklyn. New York. 1918 - NH 117794.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2022 at 00:06:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#United States
Info Unknown photographer - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info Kind of hard to know where to categorise this. If you have a suggestion, do speak up. Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd say "Cityscapes," but that's under "Places/Architecture/Cityscapes," and this isn't really about architecture. I think your category is good and probably a better alternative than "Historical#1910-1920." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well done. (I would have put this under Historical#1910-1920, but your choice of Industry makes sense.) --Aristeas (talk) 07:50, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:21, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:35, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 07:30, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 13:04, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451993 08:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 14:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Industry#United%20States

File:Фрагмент церкви. Дошки оббивки.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 08:42:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Walls
Info Blue and white painted wood, a detail of the Church of the Assumption of Mary in Lychivka, Volochysk Raion, Khmelnytskyi Oblast, Ukraine. The church was built entirely of wood (see photo) in 1884. Created and uploaded by Zysko serhii – nominated by --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC).[reply]
Support I like the minimalist beauty of this photo: the blue and white, the straight horizontal and vertical lines, contrasting with the complex structures of the wood and of the peeling paint. And the photo has also documentary value: because the complete historical church consists of wood, it is a good idea to record a detail of it in high quality. Time and wars destroy all buildings, but especially easily such wooden structures … --Aristeas (talk) 08:42, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support according to Aristeas' convincing reasoning; Imho, minimalism and simplicity in photography are the most important things of all. The more complex a scene becomes, the more difficult it is to get successful compositions and to communicate a clear message. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:12, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:00, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 16:11, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Valuable it may be, but it's nothing great to look at, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:22, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding minimalism, an adventurous nomination and a strong candidate Cmao20 (talk) 21:23, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 12:15, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Ikan, nothing special for FP here. -- Karelj (talk) 14:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 14:58, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 15:19, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:48, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is a minimalist masterpiece. Very well done!--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support has XRay vibes :) — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

--XRay 💬 08:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Another very Cart-able image. Daniel Case (talk) 18:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:55, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 & Kiril. I'd take that over any church ceiling. --El Grafo (talk) 07:48, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not out of the ordinary. --Tagooty (talk) 15:24, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452852 08:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 16:01, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Walls

File:Inter Egret Descending Tree Kabini Apr22 D72 23600.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 10 May 2022 at 15:46:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea
Info created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty Ardea intermedia (Intermediate egret), breeding plummage, descending to its perch on a dead tree stump in the Kabini Reservoir. The Gallery has many images of Great egrets but no FP of an Intermediate egret. -- Tagooty (talk) 15:46, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Arguably my best bird-in-flight image. -- Tagooty (talk) 15:46, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A bit noisy but definitely an impressive capture Cmao20 (talk) 21:26, 1 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The crop is too large IMO. Suggestion added in a note -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:49, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Basile Morin: Thanks for the suggestion. I prefer the original crop as it shows the context, the tree stump is the reason why the bird is flying in this unusual posture. --Tagooty (talk) 11:55, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aesthetically, I find the stump rather inelegant, but a tighter crop would still be possible with it. Too much empty space around the bird in the composition in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 04:22, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:09, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (talk) 21:37, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I agree with Tagooty that the stump should be kept in the photo. I wouldn't mind seeing a version of Basile's crop that does not crop the bottom, but I support the artist's original conception in the meanwhile. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:39, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:34, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 03:42, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:53, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:57, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:05, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:27, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:51, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Egretful oppose I could forgive the oversharpening on the bird's lower legs, but the stump is just too much. Daniel Case (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451847 08:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:24, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Ardea

File:Tussock moth (Laelia sp.).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2022 at 13:56:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Erebidae (Erebid Moths)
Info All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:56, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Interesting photo, but where's the eye? I'm not seeing it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:51, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I should have said that these moths hide their head (and eyes) between their legs - https://www.flickr.com/photos/itchydogimages/8119255086/in/photostream/ Charlesjsharp I suspect it is to confuse predators who attack eyes. (talk) 15:34, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:15, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Low detail, we cannot even see the head Poco a poco (talk) 17:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I am guessing it has has hidden its head between its legs in shame Poco a poco to avoid seeing your two revenge votes. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

A revenge vote? have you looked into the FPs of that category? I compared this image with the first 2 I found there (this and this) and the detail here is not bad, but definitely lower than most FPs and lower than what we can see in the category of similar species. --Poco a poco (talk) 17:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Per Poco, the quality is not here, please Charles dont take it personally, you know that you are my friend and I love this image, however, it has less details than any insect FP taken 8 years ago --Wilfredor (talk) 11:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:58, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Gulikan Theyyam Vellattam By Shagil kannur.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2022 at 06:26:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info Theyyam is a ritual art form of Indian state Kerala. It is a fusion of many folk art forms like folk dance, folk music, folk painting and literature.

All by Shagil Kannur -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 06:26, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 06:26, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Interesting, but I don't like the bottom crop, and the top crop might be a bit too high, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Top cropped. At the bottom nothing can be done. Imfo edited. Now please review your opinion Ikan Kekek -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 01:23, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

~~That's sufficient for a weak Support from me, because it's a striking, interesting image.~~ -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Would it be also possible to add some information about what we are looking at? Poco a poco (talk) 16:52, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

More infos added. Now please reconsider your vote Poco a poco. --Shagil Kannur (talk) 12:07, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support More information would be nice. Yann (talk) 12:40, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Empty space at top per Ikan, plus unsharp jewelry on head and CA on some other jewels. Daniel Case (talk) 15:13, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive. Also, I don't mind the space on the top, as the persona is clearly looking towards the sky. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:16, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Frank. --Aristeas (talk) 06:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose poor crop. For a balanced composition, I would at least like to see that circular whatsitsname in full. Why put the face into center and waste so much room above? --Kreuz schnabel 10:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

To me it is better to have some breathing space at the top as the person is looking towards the sky. --Shagil Kannur (talk) 12:02, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support I find the current top crop (not previous one with too much empty space) to be OK. Bottom can have more, but doesn't bother me too much. --UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Irshadpp (talk) 12:46, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful image. --Sreejith K (talk

) 12:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Beautiful image. -- vijayakumarblathur
Support Shajiarikkad (talk) 13:04, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A striking unique image. --Adarshjchandran (talk) 13:14, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice click ---Vijayan Rajapuram 13:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Navaneethpp (talk)
Oppose Asking users in your home wiki to support this nom is not fair to all other nominators and authors here, therefore I oppose for now. Poco a poco (talk) 16:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Same. Is there a way we can disqualify this nomination? This is obvious canvassing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:28, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Only one person, that is Shajiarikkad is not known to me. I have no idia where does he come from in this nomination. All other supporters are active users in Commons. Some of them have voted my previous nominations too. Among those Sreejith K is one of the admins of Commons. Vijayanrajapuram is an another admin in ml.wiki and an active Commons user. Other persons like Karikkan, Vijayakumarblathur, Navaneethpp are also active Commons users. Moreover all these are eminant photographers. Indeed these are all belong to my home wikipedia community, that is ml.wiki. We have discussed how to make that image more beautiful a day before. And it was a very casual discussion that I used to do with my all nominations. Still there are many other users who put forward their opinion on this image and not supported this nomination. THIS IS THE FACT. --Shagil Kannur (talk) 18:52, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

How many of them have voted on any other nominations on this page? The fact that they all suddenly came here speaks for itself. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Was the “casual discussion” on a wiki forum? If yes, then please post a link here, even if it is not in English. If it was on a different online forum, please post link. This is indeed dangerously close to canvassing. I haven’t changed my vote yet, but probably will. So far I’m assuming good faith. UnpetitproleX (talk) 01:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It was a WhatsApp group of wikipedians. Mainly discussed about the cropping of this image. I wish I could share screen shots with you. -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 16:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

My feeling is that it's fine to ask for advice about edits, but you should have explained that no-one reading there should vote on this nomination. What you did had the effect of canvassing, whether you expected all these folks to come here just to vote for your nomination or didn't think about that as a likely occurrence. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And if you consider this is a disqualification, I am ready to withdraw my nomination -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 18:56, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose --A.Savin 19:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -per Poco a poco, clear case of canvassing -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 05:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --Shagil Kannur (talk) 17:20, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Parliament building of Quebec Canada.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2022 at 16:43:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info created by User:Marc-Lautenbacher - uploaded by User:Marc-Lautenbacher - nominated by Marc-Lautenbacher -- Marc-Lautenbacher (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Marc-Lautenbacher (talk) 16:43, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Strong oppose, needs serious perspective correction. Daniel Case (talk) 18:19, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Which wouldn't help here, as the building is cut anyway. --A.Savin 18:49, 10 May 2022 (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: Does not meet COM:QI standards, sorry. --A.Savin 18:49, 10 May 2022 (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:ป้อมพระจุลจอมเกล้า-2.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 May 2022 at 18:04:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

HTMS Maeklong during sunset at Chulachomklao Fort

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Ships
Info created by Jane3030 - uploaded by Jane3030 - nominated by Mike Peel -- Mike Peel (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Mike Peel (talk) 18:04, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:38, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not technically perfect but has both beauty and wow to me and is an unusual sight to boot; that's why I recommended nominating it here and support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:34, 2 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 06:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:03, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:12, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 18:08, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:45, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pardon me for party-pooping, but I'm really not sure if wideangle is the proper choice for ship pictures, even though of course there might have been no other option at that spot. But still, what I don't like here is this unnatural distortion (also with the result that the upper chain appears longer than the ship itself), the angle of view that you cannot see the entire ship; and also the blown highlights. The evening mood is perfect, but this alone is not enough imho. --A.Savin 11:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:14, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:35, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Technical issues near the edges, but I still think that the overall image works. Daniel Case (talk) 16:41, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The wide-angle view makes it striking. --Tagooty (talk) 15:21, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452980 08:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Just registering my opposition because of the halos around every single edge due to excessive processing. Gorgeous otherwise. -- KennyOMG (talk) 21:43, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:08, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Water_transport#Ships

File:2021-07-30 Messeberg Hoheneggelsen Sommer.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2022 at 22:02:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Agriculture#Germany
Info created by Rohieb (talk) – uploaded by Rohieb (talk) – nominated by Rohieb -- Rohieb (talk) 22:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – interested what others think of it. -- Rohieb (talk) 22:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice composition but not extremely outstanding to me; others may feel differently. However, there is a lot of color noise and nothing is very sharp, so it's not a Featured Picture, and I wouldn't expect it to pass if nominated at com:qic, either. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:53, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not special enough, in my view. Noisy. Quality issue -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:15, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per opposers above, sorry. --Cayambe (talk) 05:24, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Didn’t look into it closer for technical issues but the motif as such is nothing exceptional to me, sorry. One could take dozens like this on a summer walk in the fields. --Kreuz schnabel 07:06, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing too wrong with this photo, good composition, but there is colour noise, a bit of uncorrected perspective distortion, plus for me the colours are a bit too saturated/over the top Cmao20 (talk) 08:02, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose An ordinary scene on a beautiful summer day. Daniel Case (talk) 15:36, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose (formerly FPX) Image does not fall within the guidelines, too many opposes in three days Ezarateesteban 23:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That is not a valid reason for FPX, I'm afraid. As far as the guidelines go, there's nothing wrong with this photo, it's just not all that wow-y. The proper procedure is explained here: If it has no support other than the nominator's after 5 days, it will be speedily declined automatically. --El Grafo (talk) 10:17, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Very good composition, but in full resolution too many technical issues. --Milseburg (talk) 13:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 8 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:17, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Pörtschach Hauptstraße 120 Villa Hoyos SW-Ansicht 17122021 1920.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2022 at 07:30:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Austria
Info I love the colours and the crisp wintery light in this photo. created by Johann Jaritz - uploaded by Johann Jaritz - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 07:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 07:30, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom. Also a pretty house, and the clouds help complete a circuit around the house with the snow and trees. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:15, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20 and Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 05:53, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:48, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I do not see here any reason, for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 16:12, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unappealing bottom-up angle, the first floor is hidden behind ugly bushes. Uninteresting foreground. The architecture is fine but not spectacular, just too common in my view. So no wow for me -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:23, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Shagil Kannur (talk) 05:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Cmao20. --Yann (talk) 07:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose The sort of picture I want to like but I find the timing all wrong and the composition a little awkward and crowded. Daniel Case (talk) 05:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Basile here. I miss something special, here, sorry Johann, Poco a poco (talk) 17:29, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451202 08:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 11:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Scabricola bicolor 01.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 04:17:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Mitridae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 04:17, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 04:17, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 10:57, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:50, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:45, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:37, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --FoolPiasar ⭐ talk 05:43, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:31, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 08:02, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:09, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:27, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:41, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452543 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:40, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 10:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Family : Mitridae

File:Долина на Злетовска Река.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2022 at 10:11:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural
Info created by Dean Lazarevski - uploaded by Kiril Simeonovski - nominated by Kiril Simeonovski -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:11, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 02:47, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:47, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:37, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm sorry, I looked at it several times and I find the shadow too disturbing to support. Otherwise the scenery isn't extraordinary either in my eyes Poco a poco (talk) 16:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per Poco. All the same I like the relationship between the road and the river. Might work with different light. Daniel Case (talk) 17:55, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great shapes but maybe try again on a cloudy day. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco a poco -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Poco a poco --Tagooty (talk) 15:20, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 6 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:21, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Лисеня.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2022 at 06:56:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family : Canidae (Canids)
Info created & uploaded by Byrdyak - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 06:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 06:56, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Why is it in Category:Natural heritage sites in Ternopil Oblast - wrong coordinates? --El Grafo (talk) 07:54, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Added by User:SchlurcherBot here. Tomer T (talk) 08:06, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  Actually that was User:Микола Василечко here. But why? Information on the file description page should be correct, but either the coordinates are wrong or the template is wrong. El Grafo (talk) 14:46, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  See also:
  
  File:Портрет оленя взимку.jpg - coorditane 50°03'02.0"N 25°37'07.0"E - time 2021-02-12 - February 12 (Winter!)
  
  File:Три олениці взимку.jpg - coorditane 50°03'02.0"N 25°37'07.0"E - time 2021-02-01- February 01 (Winter!)
  
  File:Олень з кленовим листком.jpg - coorditane 50°03'02.0"N 25°37'07.0"E - time 2020-11-07 - November 7 (Autumn!)
  
  and this image
  
  File:Лисеня.jpg - coorditane 50°03'02.0"N 25°37'07.0"E - time 2021-05-21 - May 21 (Spring!)
  
  Different shooting dates, different seasons. But... The same coordinates! Did this photographer in one place, without movement, did all the animals find and photographed? Ha-ha! Микола Василечко (talk) 15:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  
  See also: File:Дві сови на гілці.jpg, File:Тхір лісовий.jpg, File:Озеро серед лісу.jpg, File:Вечірнє озеро серед лісу.jpg - The same coordinates!
  I don't think using the same coordinates is particularly unusual. There have been many times I've used a single set of coordinates for a single [large] location, and several times that I've copy/pasted a set of categories and other metadata from an old upload. If those coords were all in the EXIF, it might be more unusual. Speaking of EXIF ... where is the EXIF data? — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:56, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  
  @Микола Василечко Thanks for explaining, I can see why you'd find that suspicious. But I'll have to agree with @Rhododendrites. It seems like those coordinates are all in the center of the same, rather small protected area. So the most likely explanation in my opinion is that no geotagger was used when shooting the images and the location was estimated later. So they might be a bit imprecise, but still "correct" in the sense of pointing at the right place in general. We have {{Location estimated}} for more severe cases, but I don't think that's necessary here. I'd recommend to just remove the Category and live with that bit of imprecision. El Grafo (talk) 07:30, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:13, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This photo caught my eye while looking through Byrdyak's photos a couple months ago. Something just seems off about this one, though I'm not certain it isn't my brain playing tricks on me. Look at its left paw, for example, which appears to be in shadow, but the log it's standing on is brightly lit. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:44, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose DoF is too short to work really well for me in this context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:14, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support he is shy and hiding! --Andrei (talk) 09:03, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Suspiciously. --Микола Василечко (talk) 16:00, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 16:22, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes, short dof but everything elese overcompensates it, wow! Poco a poco (talk) 20:11, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Agree. -- -donald- (talk) 05:04, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:36, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support it is super-cute Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:26, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cute, but too blurred for FP. --Tagooty (talk) 01:46, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cute we are agreed, but I find the background too busy and too blurry. Daniel Case (talk) 05:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Good shot with wow, but the metadata is not best of the best. I'm not worried about the coordinates any more, but 1) the (Google translation of the) description text says nothing about the subject, and 2) and the editing software ate most of the EXIF data. — Preceding unsigned comment added by El Grafo (talk • contribs)
Oppose very cute, but too short DoF.--Christof46 (talk) 20:31, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Basotxerri (talk) 16:07, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Certainly nice but DoF too shallow to make it useful, sorry. --Kreuz schnabel 11:05, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452558 10:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:18, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Anthyllis vulneraria inflorescence - Niitvälja.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 18:35:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Fabaceae
Info all by Ivar (talk) 18:35, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 18:35, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! Great as always. Only one small, technical bug: A tiny purple and white pixel cluster in the lower right corner. Please see annotation (probably stacking error). -- Radomianin (talk) 21:07, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. --Ivar (talk) 06:21, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 06:30, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:11, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 09:18, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:33, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 12:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Didn't notice water droplets. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Very nice! --Micha (talk) 17:16, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:51, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 04:22, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:29, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452214 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Fabaceae

File:Berlin Mariannenplatz Bethanien asv2021-11 img1.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2022 at 20:50:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info Entrance hall of the former Bethanien Hospital at Mariannenplatz Berlin-Kreuzberg; it was built in 1847, served as hospital until 1970, after that the building was considered threatened for years, today it serves as cultural venue and a coworking place for visual artists. All by me. --A.Savin 20:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 20:50, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It still looks like a hospital, albeit a pretty one, though with some tagging graffiti. Good, less usual subject and good photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:08, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:15, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 06:44, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:43, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 08:14, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:20, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great, with a sublime touch. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 13:25, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Good image, but not for FP nomination. -- Karelj (talk) 16:13, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:41, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too many posters and ugly prints ruining the charm of the place. The eye-catching red color boards are distracting. Valuable picture, but not very beautiful in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:09, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Basile here, sorry Alex Poco a poco (talk) 16:55, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 13:02, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452980 08:31, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Basile. Yann (talk) 20:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Buddhist monk on mountain path, Dharamsala (1).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 May 2022 at 14:52:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People
Info created by Artemas Liu - uploaded by B2Belgium - nominated by UnpetitproleX -- UnpetitproleX (talk) 14:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (talk) 14:52, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Is this one of the very best photos on the site? I'd like a second opinion about that. But I like the warm light, the greenery, the inviting path in front of the viewer and the possibility of thinking of oneself as the monk climbing the path. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:17, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I like the visual of the monk going through what almost feels like a tunnel. It may not the best image in the technical aspects, yes, but I like the composition and the somewhat liminal feel of it. UnpetitproleX (talk) 23:32, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad light with very dark parts, too contrasted and the foreground is out of focus -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:51, 3 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 16:19, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The balance of light and dark does not work for me in this case unfortunately, even though I like the idea behind this shot a lot --Kritzolina (talk) 06:13, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Harsh midday lighting, nothing special for me. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:23, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I didn't mind the lighting; I thought it was actually great as a visual metaphor. I found that the trees at the left didn't bother me as much as I thought they woulld. But then ... there was the horrible unsharpness in the foreground. We can't approve an FP with that. Great idea though, still. Daniel Case (talk) 02:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Good argument. I'd consider pulling my vote, but it doesn't look like this nomination will pass, anyway. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:White-plumed Honeyeater flying - Capertee Valley.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 18:32:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Meliphagidae_(Honeyeaters)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 18:32, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 18:32, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:14, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another incredible capture by Maestro JJ! -- Radomianin (talk) 21:28, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Outstanding. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 21:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:14, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 06:30, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:30, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support of course Cmao20 (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:11, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Colin (talk) 09:17, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:30, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:20, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 19:29, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:52, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 04:30, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:02, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Je-str (talk) 19:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452355 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks almost like a painting. Daniel Case (talk) 02:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Meliphagidae_(Honeyeaters)

File:Juveniler Hausrotschwanz (Phoenicurus ochruros) 01.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2022 at 09:42:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Muscicapidae_(Old_World_Flycatchers)
Info created by Ssprmannheim - uploaded by Ssprmannheim - nominated by Ssprmannheim -- Ssprmannheim (talk) 09:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ssprmannheim (talk) 09:42, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 11:07, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:43, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:59, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:54, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:40, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:06, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm beginning to get jaded with so many good birds perched in similar poses, but this is certainly a good one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:38, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Shagil Kannur (talk) 05:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:03, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:40, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A good composition and sharpness of the head etc. The tail and rump feathers are blurred and noisy. Sorry to oppose, but IMO not up to the standards of FPs in the Gallery. --Tagooty (talk) 01:39, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:12, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Good, but: Description missing, categorization improvable, geo location missing --XRay 💬 08:44, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful weak oppose per Tagooty. Daniel Case (talk) 18:54, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:53, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451833 08:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 14:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Muscicapidae_(Old_World_Flycatchers)

File:Blue-tailed bee-eater (Merops philippinus) Yala 2.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2022 at 13:39:51 (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-- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The eye looks fine, everything else lacks details and looks overprocessed Poco a poco (talk) 17:17, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Moderate Support File:SL Bundala NP asv2020-01 img08.jpg seems sharper when compared at the same size, but for a bird that's 23-26 cm long, this seems sharp enough, it's a very pretty bird, and the composition is good. In the future, if we have a bunch of much sharper photos, we could revisit things, but at this point, there would be 3 FPs of this species. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:25, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:50, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452753 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:00, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 07:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:01, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mating pair of Ypthima newara Moore, 1875 - Newar Three-ring WLB IMG 0716.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2022 at 20:32:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info created by Sandipoutsider - uploaded by Sandipoutsider - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 20:32, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:18, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 04:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:32, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support-- Shagil Kannur (talk) 05:42, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:20, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:33, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 07:38, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:12, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:53, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Captured at the right moment! --Tagooty (talk) 01:33, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:08, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:43, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:14, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:37, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unsharp edges of the butterflies; we've had better in other butterfly pics. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment We have, but the reason this gets my support is the beauty of the composition with the two butterflies of this species. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:16, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I have seen sharper butterfly pics but this should be FP imo Cmao20 (talk) 07:58, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:27, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451411 08:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:45, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)

File:Morena gigante (Gymnothorax javanicus), Ras Katy, Sharm el-Sheij, Egipto, 2022-03-26, DD, DD 83.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 13 May 2022 at 19:30:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Muraenidae_(Moray_Eels)
Info Giant moray (Gymnothorax javanicus) surrounded by net fire coral (Millepora dichotoma), Ras Katy, Sharm el-Sheikh, Red Sea, Egypt. This species of marine fish is the largest moray eel in terms of body mass (the slender giant moray is the largest in terms of body length, though). The giant moray can reach up to 3 m (9.8 ft) in length and 30 kg (66 lb) in weight. While juveniles are tan in color with large black spots, adults have black specks that grade into leopard-like spots behind the head. It's widespread in the Indo-Pacific region, being found from eastern coast of Africa, Red Sea included, until the Pitcairn group, Hawaiian islands and also Polynesia. North to south Japan and south to New Caledonia, Fiji and the Austral Islands. It lives in lagoons and on the outer slopes of coral reefs. During the day, it sits sheltered in crevices between 1 and 50 meters deep. The giant moray is carnivorous (feeds on fish and occasionally on crustaceans) and nocturnal, hunting its prey within the reef. It is known to engage in cooperative hunting with the roving coral grouper (Plectropomus pessuliferus). These two fish species are complementary hunters: While the eel hunts in the reef, it may scare prey up and out of the reef, leaving them to be eaten by the grouper. Similarly, the grouper hunting above the reef may cause prey to attempt to seek refuge in the reef, where the moray may ambush them. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 19:30, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:30, 4 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:17, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nicely framed by the coral. You should put all that description on the file page, where it'll be easier to find. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:35, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done, sometimes takes a few days longer, but I always use the description here for the image description page. Thanks. Poco a poco (talk) 06:31, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:07, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:06, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:51, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:09, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:36, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:13, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:41, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately for me it is too well framed by the coral ... I thought at first it was supposed to be the subject, then read the description and realized there was a fish there as well. Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't understand the real issue here. Daniel Case. You would have supported the image as FP without the moray eel? I find the frame good as it guides the attention to the center where you can see the head of this huge fish. On ther other side, I'm with you that the coral does play an important role in the image so I identified it and added it to the description page and also to the description here. Poco a poco (talk) 17:27, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The fish is rather neutral in color and we don't see all of it ... it doesn't jump out at you as well as it should. Daniel Case (talk) 18:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Compelling composition makes this one of your best underwater pics Cmao20 (talk) 07:55, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452487 08:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 20:34, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:45, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Pez globo (Arothron stellatus), Ras Katy, Sharm el-Sheij, Egipto, 2022-03-26, DD, DD 119.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 17 May 2022 at 19:26:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Tetraodontidae_(Pufferfish)
Info Stellate puffer (Arothron stellatus), Ras Katy, Sharm el-Sheikh, Red Sea, Egypt. This demersal marine fish belongs to the pufferfish family. It is found in shallow water in tropical and subtropical waters from the Indian Ocean and Red Sea as far as Polynesia, southern Japan, the western, northern and eastern coasts of Australia and Lord Howe Island. It's a medium-sized fish which can grow up to 120 cm (47 in) in length and has a large head and no pelvic fin. It feeds on benthic invertebrates, sponges, algae, the polyps of corals, crustaceans and mollusks. This pufferfish is diurnal, is mainly solitary and defends a territory. As with many other puffers, this pufferfish has a symbiotic relationship with types of bacteria that produces tetradotoxin which is a powerful neurotoxin. Tetradoxin is found in their skin and internal organs like liver and is approximately 100 times more toxic than cyanide, what makes pufferfishes among the most poisonous vertebrates in the world. They are therefore highly toxic to most animals when eaten. Nevertheless, the meat of some species is considered a delicacy in Japan, Korea, and China when prepared by specially trained chefs who know which part is safe to eat and in what quantity. Furthermore one of the most known characteristics of pufferfishes is that they can inflate taking water or air an so multiply their size several times to avoid that they can be swallowed by predators. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 19:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 19:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:48, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 04:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:28, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 11:45, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The description here is considerably longer than that found in the image description. Excellent quality, at first I thought it was in an aquarium. --Wilfredor (talk) 11:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I copied the description to the image desc page Poco a poco (talk) 16:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- IamMM (talk) 12:51, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:43, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451677 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:23, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good one Cmao20 (talk) 12:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:38, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:01, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 05:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support OK, this one works. Daniel Case (talk) 19:28, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:43, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Black-and-white warbler in Prospect Park (06193)2.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2022 at 21:25:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Parulidae_(New_World_Warblers)
Info Black-and-white warbler (Mniotilta varia). From what I'm told, the brown wing and tail feathers indicates the bird is about a year old, having completed its first round-trip migration. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:25, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:02, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:41, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:42, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:53, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 11:28, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:16, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose DoF and composition is good, but the foreground seems overexposed, resulting in a bleached look on the black feathers. The shadow in the background is also not doing you any favours. --Rohieb (talk) 22:11, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 08:45, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 02:40, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 07:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support It would be nice not to have the shadow but here it doesn't get in the way. Daniel Case (talk) 04:45, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452322 08:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Parulidae_(New_World_Warblers)

File:Siebenpunkt-Marienkäfer (Coccinella septempunctata) auf Blüte im FFH-Gebiet "Viernheimer Waldheide und angrenzende Flächen".jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2022 at 15:58:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Coccinellidae_(Ladybugs)
Info created and uploaded by Ssprmannheim - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 15:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 15:58, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:05, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but I think the plant should also be identified and included among the categories, and an English description would be nice, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

English description added. Identifying the plant may take some time, I will add it soon. -- IamMM (talk) 19:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:56, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Je-str (talk) 19:47, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support but please remove dust spots --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ssprmannheim has been active in Commons recently and because I do not know what he thinks about other people making changes to his images, I prefer to ask him to remove dust spots. -- IamMM (talk) 19:07, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:49, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451098 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:10, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support excellent! — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:52, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:03, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 05:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now, those are colours! Poco a poco (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--El Grafo (talk) 14:25, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 19:41, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Coccinellidae_(Ladybugs)

File:Snowy egret in JBWR (30217).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2022 at 15:17:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Egretta
Info Snowy egret (Egretta thula) stepping through a saltwater marsh. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 15:17, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:06, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:01, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:22, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 17:40, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 07:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:47, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452281 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:05, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:36, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Marc-Lautenbacher (talk) 16:08, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The quality is there and the bokeh nice but I miss something more given that we have a lot of egret FPs. I'm supporting because this would be the second FP of this species but wow factor is rather low to me in the meanwhile. My two cents. Poco a poco (talk) 19:02, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great shot! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:03, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 00:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Pelecaniformes#Genus_:_Egretta

File:Поляницький регіональний парк. Скелі Довбуша.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 14 May 2022 at 13:43:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
Info created and uploaded by Пивовар Павло - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 13:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:43, 5 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A spectacular view in beautiful morning light. The technical quality is not perfect, but very good (nitpicking: there are some minor CAs in the corners, but we have promoted photos with much more prominent CAs; if the CAs are a problem, I can try to fix them). IMHO there are two questions. (1) Sharpness: The focus was obviously more on the foreground and the background seems less sharp. However the trees on the rocks in the midground are still sharp, therefore I think the apparent unsharpness of the background is mostly due to the morning mist, so OK. (2) This photo seems almost too good to be true ;–). Has the photographer overprocessed it? It’s obvious that the saturation is high, but all in all the colours are appropriate for the season (autumn foliage) and the daytime (warm light of the raising sun). Therefore the photographer may have increased the saturation etc. in post-processing, but IMHO the result is still realistic and sensible. --Aristeas (talk) 06:54, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much for your analysis and convincing argumentation, Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 07:50, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 13:15, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose -- unnatural colours, sharpness, overprocessed. A very good photo, but for an "excellent" everything really has to fit. Je-str (talk) 14:45, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:38, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great shot but it needs a rework: 1) more realistic colors 2) perspective correction (both sides are leaning out) 3) CA removal. If those issues are fixed I'd support Poco a poco (talk) 16:51, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think we have gone too far in the direction of anti-500px. The colors are appropriate for the scene IMO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:22, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the colors are well-represented here for a sunrise in autumn. Great subject too. --Rohieb (talk) 22:15, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 12:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Je-str. --A.Savin 02:45, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Colours a little overdone for my taste but not insane. Minor technical faults don't outweigh an outstandingly beautiful composition Cmao20 (talk) 07:57, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:26, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per others; technical flaws (very apparent at lower left). Daniel Case (talk) 15:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose because of mentioned technical issues. --Basotxerri (talk) 15:54, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --Uoaei1 (talk) 18:19, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 00:16, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Hannover - Neues Rathaus - Wendeltreppe (7428 - 2).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2022 at 10:54:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
Info Spiral staircase in the Neues Rathaus, the city hall of Hanover. created by T meltzer - uploaded by T meltzer - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 10:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 10:54, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 15:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:42, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451498 23:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 06:55, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:50, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Shouldn't the dome be a circle, it is oval Poco a poco (talk) 19:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:21, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:16, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Nelumbo nucifera, also known as Indian lotus in bud stage (Image 7 of 7).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2022 at 06:40:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Nelumbonaceae
All by Subhrajyoti07 -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 06:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 06:40, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Not sharp enough for me and noise.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:38, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Added selective denoising. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 18:04, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I think the background is too busy here. --Rohieb (talk) 22:12, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The background is unattractive, too busy. --Cayambe (talk) 05:27, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Moral support IMHO this photo deserves a little bit love ;–). I like the mood, the soft light and the delicate colours, and the background is IMHO really not bad because it melts away but still intimates the natural surroundings of this plant. Of course, on this page (FPC) we are now used to wonderful close-up photographs of buds and flowers which are completely sharp, created with focus stacking, and compared to them this picture seems to disappoint. But it’s a bit unfair to compare it to the focus-stacking images: this shot just belongs to a different genre. Such close-up photographs of flowers with low DoF are indeed quite popular (see Flickr), some great photographers have indulged in that genre, and while their educational value may be lower than the one of the focus-stacking shots, the best low-DoF flower photos are real artworks which have their value in themselves. Now this photo is not a perfect example – the background is a bit busy and I would prefer if at least the central part of the bud was perfectly crisp and sharp. But it’s not easy to achieve this (that’s another reason why really good low-DoF flower photos are indeed works of art ;–), therefore my moral support for this appealing photo. --Aristeas (talk) 09:52, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am truly touched by your words on this photo Aristeas. Whether this photo becomes FP is a different issue. But I will certainly carry these encouraging words with me. God bless you. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 10:48, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! – Changed from ‘weak support’ to ‘support’ per Cmao20’s statement below. --Aristeas (talk) 05:47, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Aristeas except that honestly I quite like the background. It's nice to see the flower in the background echoing the one in the foreground in terms of angle. Cmao20 (talk) 08:00, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Qualified support Still not technically perfect but it's below the threshold for me to care. Background doesn't hurt. Daniel Case (talk) 04:47, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others, and I like the bg for the same reason as Cmao20 --UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452053 08:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:19, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 11:59, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Painted stork (Mycteria leucocephala) catching fish 3 of 3.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2022 at 09:04:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Ciconiidae (Storks)
Info One FP from 2012 that would struggle today. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good indeed Cmao20 (talk) 12:40, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:58, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:45, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:11, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support But what's that about FPs from 2012? Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:16, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This. Quite a good picture, though a little small. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:19, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support As a minor nitpick, I happen not to love the two little bokeh circles, but this is a really good picture. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:21, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452644 23:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The fish is a good feature -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:11, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (talk) 02:25, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 05:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I hope the fish is tasty … --Aristeas (talk) 07:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:58, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:21, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Why f/10? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:04, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Chosen to show the reflection well. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If it's about the reflection, do you have room to crop less tightly on the bottom, so that the reflection is not cut off? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, the pond wasn't big enough to capture all of it. But anyway that would make the bird smaller in the frame and the fish would be even smaller. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:03, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support The fish makes it. Daniel Case (talk) 17:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:17, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Ciconiidae (Storks)

File:Amédée Forestier - Illustrated London News - Gilbert and Sullivan - Ruddygore (Ruddigore).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 15 May 2022 at 17:52:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera
Info created by Amédée Forestier - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:52, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 6 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:55, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:32, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice to see some G&S Cmao20 (talk) 08:00, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
As a member of the Dunfermline and Kirkcaldy Gilbert and Sullivan Societies, I'm always open to G&S. Hence this being from my personal collection. One of those things where I started this years ago, wasn't good enough yet to finish it, and now am. Adam Cuerden (talk) 13:39, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Ultimately, it would be nice to get it into a lossless format like .PNG. Daniel Case (talk) 15:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Check the file description page. But I doubt Wikimedia will ever fix their bug where PNGs aren't sharpened, so the JPEG copy of the PNG is the best option for on here. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:44, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451702 08:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:26, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Non-photographic_media/Entertainment#Music_and_Opera

File:John Milton Brannan by the Studio of Mathew Brady - NPG 81 M465.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2022 at 16:03:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Studio of Mathew Brady - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:03, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 20:29, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good portrait of an important military man in 19th-century America. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:14, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452776 23:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:52, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:58, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 21:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:30, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:38, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:06, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 23:54, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:River Anjarakkandy of Kerala.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2022 at 17:30:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info River Anjarakkandy is a small river in Kerala.

All by Shagil Kannur -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Shagil Kannur (talk) 17:30, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looks like a lovely place to be, and a pleasant photo, but it's ultimately mostly sky. The vegetation lacks detail, especially on the right. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:50, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose palm leaf at the upper left corner, saturated colors. Not a very special landscape in my view -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:14, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Oversaturated. -- -donald- (talk) 04:52, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Saturation is IMO too much, and the palm leaf is distracting, I think it also needs perspective correction. Very pretty though Cmao20 (talk) 23:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 23:56, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:23, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ancient Windmills of Nashtifan 2021-07-17.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 04:41:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors
Info created by Hadidehghanpour - uploaded by Hadidehghanpour - nominated by 4nn1l2 -- 4nn1l2 (talk) 04:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Got the 9th prize worldwide in Wiki Loves Monuments 2021-- 4nn1l2 (talk) 04:41, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Certainly interesting, but so small for 2021! Also, how do people feel about perspective correction vs. keeping things as is? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:48, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support The size is definitely a minus but the subject, compo and lighting overcompensates it IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 16:42, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Overprocessed (like this one or that one by the same author), and only 2,500 × 1,467 pixels, low resolution -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:28, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --A.Savin 02:37, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Certainly impressive and doesn't need perspective correction but IMO too small for FP and the sky is overprocessed, it no longer looks realistic Cmao20 (talk) 08:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose realism aside, the overly dramatic sky also really distracts from the main subject. --El Grafo (talk) 08:21, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 04:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 06:49, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Myrmecia nigrocincta (Australian Bull Ant).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2022 at 12:46:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family : Formicidae (Ants)
Info created by User:Matt Inman - uploaded by User:Spongepuppy - nominated by Lallint. Previously mentioned on January 5, 2013, but was not nominated because it was put on the talk page instead of in a nomination request. -- Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk 12:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as nominator -- Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk 12:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 14:30, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice shot (even for a dead animal) Poco a poco (talk) 18:46, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Poco. The left crop is not ideal but the photo surely has wow. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:42, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 12:39, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:59, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:04, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 06:40, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451568 07:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:09, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family : Formicidae (Ants)

File:Sheesh Mahal, Shahi Qila, Lahore (1).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 21:50:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Info created and uploaded by Faisalrazamalik - nominated by UnpetitproleX -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry UnpetitproleX but this is not a FP, there are several issues here. While the detail is ok (but not extraordinary) the shadow in front of it is a minus (a crop could solve that issue), along with the lack of symmetry (the photographer should have taken the picture from one step further to the right), the cropped doors and the overexposed area in the middle (HDR would have helped here). Poco a poco (talk) 12:32, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco, maybe on a less sunny day this would have worked. --A.Savin 12:42, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 19:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Yokohama Stadium.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2022 at 18:36:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes
Info created by Chme82 (talk) 18:39, 11 May 2022 (UTC) - uploaded by Chme82 (talk) 18:39, 11 May 2022 (UTC) - nominated by Chme82 -- Chme82 (talk) 18:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Chme82 (talk) 18:36, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice view but the lighting is not really good and the drop of quality in both sides is not at FP level, sorry --Poco a poco (talk) 18:53, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above but a nice photo and QI, just the same. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:41, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Apart from the quality issues I do miss an elaborate composition here, the cut-off buildings on all sides make the framing look arbitrary. --Kreuz schnabel 21:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't see why the lighting should be bad - otherwise it wouldn't be a quality picture. The quality also decreases only imperceptibly at the edge of the picture. This picture conveys an impressive atmosphere and is, in my opinion, the best picture of the Yokohama Stadium on Commons. But of course the decision is up to you. Chme82 (talk) 21:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment "Best in scope" is a COM:VIC argument. If you're convinced it's best in that scope, please nominate there. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose per Kreuzschnabel, a good QI but IMO not an FP level composition Cmao20 (talk) 23:11, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Maybe with a higher angle and better light, but as is this looks like just another picture of an outdoor stadium in a typical cityscape. Daniel Case (talk) 18:46, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I withdraw my nomination because it seems impossible to me to get enough positive votes. The nomination of the picture was based on my assessment that in terms of "wow effect", composition and quality, my picture is within the range of recently promoted pictures. I would be happy to receive more substantiated feedback for future nomination: In order to make better pictures, I would like to know what exactly has to be done better regarding lighting or what exactly needs to be improved in the composition. Thank you. Chme82 (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Chme82 (talk) 20:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:20130816 Kuehtai TunnelUnderSkiingSlope DSC07218 PtrQs.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 19:38:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Austria
Info created & uploaded by PtrQs - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 19:38, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 19:38, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:46, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent artistic photo Cmao20 (talk) 08:06, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I expect this is a tunnel for skiers to use in the winter. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:03, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very standard image one gets if photographing at the entrance of a tunnel. Just a photo of a friend with backpack on a walk, like anyone might take, and turning it b&w doesn't make it artistic. Compare File:SMP May 2008-9a.jpg and File:The Photographer.jpg where the silhouette is worth capturing. -- Colin (talk) 09:25, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Colin.--Ermell (talk) 21:50, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well, as the title says, during winter this is a tunnel for pedestrians passing under the skiing slope (Dreiseenbahn 1), located in Tyrolean Kühtai. Same way, as the photographer of the cited marvellous pictures was fascinated by the contrast of the black and white areas, I was caught by the contrast of the concentric rings of the metal tube focusing my view on the person and the end of the tunnel leading her/us into the invisible world outside. --PtrQs (talk) 00:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This is one of the rather rare occasions where I'll have to disagree with Colin. In my opinion, this one fits in very well with the other two examples, while still being different enough to stand out. While the other ones focus a lot on the entries and/or exits of the tunnels, the landscape orientation and structured walls in this one put much stronger emphasis on the tunnel itself. The Photographer is about to step into the light. You're just observing, this is not about you. The joggers have already made it to the other side, while you're not even inside yet. You have no clue what they've gone though. But this one puts you right in the darkest part and while you can see the light, there's still a long way to go. The person a few steps ahead of you seems to say "come on, let's go", ready to take your hand and venture into the unknown. Or maybe from over there they can already see something you can't? The silhouette itself may not be as interesting as the one in "The Photographer", but I find the backpack very fitting. One of the strongest symbolic images I've seen here for a while. --El Grafo (talk) 08:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. One of the things that really struck me and appealed to me about this photo is precisely that you can see the light at the end of the tunnel, but that's all you can see past the tunnel, and it can represent many things. Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:10, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes, lots of things to discover in there - or in yourself, while looking at it. Here's a more fun one: James Bond gun barrel sequence. It's my desktop wallpaper now, which is noteworthy because I usually just use a plain calm color fill. El Grafo (talk) 10:51, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support according to the convincing picture analyses. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:08, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per El Grafo. Yann (talk) 18:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per El Grafo. And this one is about the concentric rings. --Aristeas (talk) 07:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452290 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:22, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Tempered support The grayscale helps make the noise less of an issue. Daniel Case (talk) 03:00, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support craftmanship blended with story telling skills, qualifies this frame for me. --Virtual-Pano (talk) 22:47, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Female Indian Leopard Head Nagarhole Karnataka Apr22 D72 24071.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 15:11:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Felidae_(Felids)
Info created by Tagooty - uploaded by Tagooty - nominated by Tagooty. Sub-adult female Indian leopard (Panthera pardus fusca) resting in a grassy ditch, closeup of head from about 10 m (33 ft), Nagarhole Tiger Reserve, Karnataka, India. (There is only one FP of Indian leopard.) -- Tagooty (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tagooty (talk) 15:11, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd warm it a bit in terms of WB but otherwise FP to me Poco a poco (talk) 16:37, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done @Poco a poco: My wife was studying the leopard with her binoculars and particularly noticed the green tint in the iris and the pale yellow fur. I've slightly warmed it without losing the greenish iris. --Tagooty (talk) 03:13, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Impressive Cmao20 (talk) 08:04, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I find the grass on the chin disturbing ~~as well as the transmitter on the neck.~~--Ermell (talk) 21:59, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I do not see a transmitter. Black lumps on the left ear are ticks. The other versions show the neck clear. —Tagooty (talk) 13:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 07:26, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Also, I can't seem to find the transmitter on the neck. Am I missing something? --UnpetitproleX (talk) 11:03, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose WB off to Greenland, harsh contrast (whiskers blown), looks oversharpened at pixel level, and yes, that particular blade of grass … --Kreuz schnabel 11:09, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The leopard was in the shade. Colour is correct to the best of our recollection. Another version of the leopard in the sun is warmer. —Tagooty (talk) 13:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support I agree with Ermell, although overall it is FP for me. -- IamMM (talk) 12:48, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The more I look at it, the more weird the 'floating' blades of grass on the chin and to the right seem. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Charlesjsharp: These "floating" blades of grass made me take several looks at this image. What is a carnivore doing apparently eating grass? To me, this adds to the mystery and attraction of the image! --Tagooty (talk) 04:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451687 08:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose WB. Daniel Case (talk) 18:13, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I think the image is worthy of FP. --Navneetsharmaiit (talk) 10:14, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others --El Grafo (talk) 14:26, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Karelj (talk) 11:12, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:17, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:11, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Trabala vishnou guttata dorsal.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 16 May 2022 at 15:49:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Lasiocampidae_(Eggars)
Info Dorsal view of a resting male Taiwan rose-myrtle lappet moth (Trabala vishnou guttata), an endemic moth subspecies of Taiwan. All by Tiouraren -- Tiouraren (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tiouraren (talk) 15:49, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:39, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
There's a few focus stack errors (I presume?) that I've marked. Brilliant image outside of them. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:58, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: I moved your image notes, supposed to be placed on the nomination page, not the file page, otherwise they appear on Wikipedia. See Commons:Image annotations#Examples of inappropriate and not-informative notes. -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:47, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose I don't like an artificial background. This was taken on a black background then heavily retouched giving an unnatural result. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:25, 7 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not a perfect focus stack, per Adam, but very good anyway Cmao20 (talk) 08:05, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose great specimen, but looks like some of the frames were out of focus. --Ivar (talk) 11:54, 8 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 04:35, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451608 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Ivar and Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 18:16, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 20:32, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Dimartz (talk) 17:51, 12 May 2022 (UTC) perfection is imperfect too.[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 22:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Lasiocampidae_(Eggars)

File:Frozen Ice Bubble.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 17:37:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Ice
Info created and uploaded by Larry-pilot - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 17:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Blown highlights, blue hue, and some parts are blurred. File:Frostedbubble2.jpg was much better -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:47, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think you are right. -- IamMM (talk) 04:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination -- IamMM (talk) 04:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:SLM DIA2022-0010 – Gatuparti med badhus i Gnesta - Restoration.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 15:48:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Settlements#Sweden
Info created by Amadeus Bianchini - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Info So, obviously, the top of one of the buildings is cut off, and if that's a blocker, even on a moderately early historic photo, I understand. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:48, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I wonder why the lamp has photobombed the shot? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs) 16:12, 15 May 2022 (UTC) (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Apart from the compositional points mentioned above, I can't see what is so special about this particular location. --Peulle (talk) 16:15, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Seems tilted, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:09, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Roof cut, intrusive lamp. Dull light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cardinal rouge (Pyrochroa serraticornis), Parc de Woluwé, Bruxelles - Flickr - Frank.Vassen.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 03:07:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Order_:_Coleoptera_(Beetles)
Info created by Frank Vassen - uploaded by Red panda bot - nominated by Shizhao -- shizhao (talk) 03:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- shizhao (talk) 03:07, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Needs quite a bit of work on the focus-stacking and the over-exposed top right corner. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:19, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. As lovely as the colors are in thumb, you do not want to look closely at it and see all the artifacts and noise. Daniel Case (talk) 01:45, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:05, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:View of the Ferry Building from Pier 1, San Francisco dllu.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2022 at 04:54:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United States
Info created by dllu - uploaded by dllu - nominated by Dllu -- dllu (t,c) 04:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- dllu (t,c) 04:54, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 11:46, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Lovely appeasable image, however, the moon appears oval, and prominent red light reflection in the lower right distracts from the composition. The composition wanted to cover too much from my humble opinion.--Wilfredor (talk) 11:57, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment the moon will always be oval in the edge of a wide angle rectilinear lens. See File:Gnomonic with Tissot's Indicatrices of Distortion.svg. dllu (t,c) 15:56, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, and that's why there are profiles for lens distortion correction in Lightroom profiles, Capture One, etc. --Wilfredor (talk) 23:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Wilfredor, perspective distortion is completely different from barrel/pincushion distortion. Lightroom profiles, Capture One, etc correct for the latter. But even the most perfectly corrected rectilinear wide angle lens will have an oval moon in the edge, at the same time while all straight lines are perfectly straight. This is an unavoidable truth of mathematics. Read this article if you're interested. dllu (t,c) 06:23, 16 July 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ermell (talk) 20:11, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:59, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:44, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451544 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 12:04, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I am sorry to oppose a photo that looks like it could pass and I wouldn't be unhappy to see it succeed but although the image quality is very good, for me I am missing an outstanding composition Cmao20 (talk) 12:38, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 14:35, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The giant red reflection spoils all. --A.Savin 18:55, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - Such a beautiful picture and so clean image (given it's a long exposure, night photography). I have admired the earlier works of this user before too (line scan photos of trains). Only three things are bothering me - The intensity of bright red reflection on water, the intensity of bright blue light at the top of the skyscraper in right and there is a prominent banding across the sky which encircle the upper side of the moon and stretches all the way towards the right of the frame. All three I think easily fixable in LR. If done it's a support from me - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 13:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I love the composition of the cityscape part. And I guess it would work with the bridge. But the red reflections—not just distracting but posterized in a way such reflections are not in other long-exposure night cityscapes with water reflections—are a dealbreaker. Daniel Case (talk) 19:33, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I really like it with the reflections. --Stepro (talk) 09:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 08:40, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Bar-shouldered Dove 1 - Woy Woy.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 05:49:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Columbidae_(Pigeons_and_Doves)
Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 05:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 05:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not one of his finest with the low DoF (see tail) and the blurred foreground which is his style with this lens. NR from ISO3200 probaly hasn't helped. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:13, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Shooting wide open for background separation in not his style, it's standard among bird photographers. Commons seems to be the only place where high depth-of-field is a thing. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:02, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Typo? This was shot 'wide open'. Asking for more of a bird this far away to be in focus is not really a demand for high DoF is it? For me, this has no wow. It looks like an ordinary capture of a scene that's all too common. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:22, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support The wow may be a matter of taste, of course. For me this photo has wow and the eye and the area around it are very sharp. --Aristeas (talk) 14:59, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:23, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas.--Ermell (talk) 20:34, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Miscategorized. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:49, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Fixed. --Aristeas (talk) 08:40, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Maybe not his best but still FP for me, lovely colours and composition Cmao20 (talk) 23:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 02:20, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:53, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451233 07:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:44, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I agree with Charles that it wouldn't be an unusual photo of a bird. But I love the colors ... we have very few pictures of animals on a yellow background, and most of them are insects. We only have one other photo of a bird on a yellow background, and of course it's also from Australia, would you imagine? And it's an FP too! However, I'd more honestly characterize that background color as beige. Daniel Case (talk) 03:31, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:54, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Columbidae_(Pigeons_and_Doves)

File:Yponomeuta evonymella - Cirsium arvense - Keila.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 05:44:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Yponomeutidae_(Ermine_Moths)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 05:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 05:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:52, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Nice, but what about a rotation clockwise? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:20, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment this photo is reflecting the nature, not every flower is standing at excactly 90°. --Ivar (talk) 10:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thanks for the explanation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support It was just a suggestion. For macro photos, the 'horizon' is seldom important. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:04, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:58, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Awesome both the plant and the animal in focus stacking. Nice light -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 02:17, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452108 07:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:25, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:30, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 21:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:24, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 13:02, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 16:53, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Yponomeutidae_(Ermine_Moths)

File:CP 5600 Sabugal - Benespera.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2022 at 13:15:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Rail vehicles
Info Another lovely train photo with IMO really nice composition and colours. created by Kabelleger - uploaded by Kabelleger - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 13:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 13:15, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:47, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The trees and bushes look a bit unnatural to me (due to noise reduction?), but it’s a striking view with good composition and colours. --Aristeas (talk) 06:44, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment This effect is very pronounced for structure sizes that are a bit below the resolution of the camera. Strangely the drone camera seems to be more prone to this than my DSLR, I can't really explain why, maybe something with the debayering isn't ideal. I don't really have a solution for this; reducing noise reduction doesn't help. --Kabelleger (talk) 12:28, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you for the explanation! It’s good to know that this is an effect of the camera itself and not of overdone post-processing (I thought that there was too much noise reduction, this can sometimes show a similar effect). Well, I think it’s still good, especially because the train and other important structure are not affected by it. --Aristeas (talk) 14:56, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nice shot and good quality, but surrounding is not very wowing. In any case less then other train-shots of Kabelleger.--Milseburg (talk) 15:40, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree. Not one of the very best shots on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:40, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per Milseburg; still good for a QI nom though. --A.Savin 12:46, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Very weak oppose If this were someone whose work I'd never seen before, nominating for the first time, I might have been willing to consider supporting. But I know David's work well, and he's nominated—to our approval—much better (Still definitely a QI though). Daniel Case (talk) 01:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination fair enough. Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 18:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:10-04-2010 in Warsaw.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2022 at 22:20:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical#1990-now
Info created by Kuba Bożanowski - uploaded by Andrew J.Kurbiko - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 22:20, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 22:20, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose too noise, copyright violation (the newspapper is a main subject of the photo and isn't free) Ezarateesteban 23:13, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Poland appears to have FOP for 2d works, but I'd defer to someone with more knowledge about the nuance of Polish law about this. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Not really noisy to me, just a little grainy and with a short DoF, but everything is recognizable, and the composition has grown on me, such that I now find it quite good. The amount of the newspaper that's readable is probably fair use. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:46, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. – The photos visible on the newspaper page can certainly be handled de minimis (i.e. no legal problem), and the design of that newspaper itself is so mediocre that it would be crazy to claim a copyright for it. ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 07:52, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agree -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:06, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452027 08:33, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support An important contemporary picture; significant composition. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:44, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 12:40, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I don't mind some noise, but while this is a clearly valuable piece of photojournalism and documentation of a moment, couldn't that newspaper just be put in any average scene with the same (or better) effect? i.e. there's not much I take away from the expressions, [in]actions, composition that helps tell the story of that day -- just a newspaper. Not opposing -- just wondering out loud. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 22:00, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good point, Rhododendrites. This event ripped open deep wounds and trenches at that time. Katyń is a symbol of the great national trauma of the murder of several thousand Polish officers by the Soviets in 1940, the guilt of which was only acknowledged by Gorbachev in 1990. Traumatic was also the denial and suppression of this truth by the communist rulers in the PR Poland. The delegation in the plane wanted to commemorate this crime and was killed with a blow. A week after the accident, I was on the streets of Warsaw during the official mourning ceremonies and felt the paralysis of the people. Perhaps the comparatively usual photo impresses me more because of the personal experience. -- Radomianin (talk) 05:00, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for the explanation, Radomianin! --Aristeas (talk) 07:45, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weak support Per Rhododendrites it's not the aesthetics, but the historical value and the street-photography immediacy the angle and grayscale imbue it with. Daniel Case (talk) 17:22, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bad composition and quality --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 8 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 06:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Historical#1990-now

File:Coral pulsante (Xenia umbellata), Ras Katy, Sharm el-Sheij, Egipto, 2022-03-26, DD, DD 96.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 20:54:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Phylum_:_Cnidaria
Info White pulse coral (Xenia umbellata), Ras Katy, Red Sea, Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt. This species of soft marine coral resembles a mushroom, with "arms" coming out from the top that end in many-fingered "hands". It is unique among corals because of its ability to use its "hands" to "pulse" or push water away from the colony in a constant, grabbing motion. Thus the common name fast-pulse Xenia or pulse corals. I can tell you that observing this coral under water seeing how quick the arms open and close is absolutely fascinating, you can get an idea here. Note: we don't have yet any FPs of this class of animal. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 20:54, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good one, nice and sharp and with a good background Cmao20 (talk) 23:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 08:14, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao, and beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 08:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:23, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:53, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:11, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451281 07:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:30, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support also the clear VI for this species — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:36, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 08:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 13:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 05:55, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals#Phylum_:_Cnidaria

File:White stork (Ciconia ciconia) in flight with transmitter.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 19:57:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Ciconiidae (Storks)
Info There is bad news and good news. Farmers in southern Spain use many tons of plastic sheeting to retain moisture in the soil. It ends up everywhere and little is biodegradable. The storks use it for nest material and the chicks don't know it isn't food. The white stork used to be IUCN Near Threatened, but conservation efforts have increased numbers. This bird carries a radio transmitter. Two existing FPs of the white stork in flight - this one and this one. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:57, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Lupe (talk) 23:05, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now, this one is excellent. High educational value! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:01, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 03:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Better than the two existing photos of this species in flight. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:39, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:04, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 06:43, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Slightly underexposed. I also find the bright border around the animal unattractive. This is particularly pronounced on the plastic part.--Ermell (talk) 08:20, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Support Much better. Thanks.--Ermell (talk) 22:03, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:29, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The image is oversharpened, there is a halo around the whole silhouette. The head also looks overprocessed to me, to much Topaz AI here, it doesn't look natural/real to me. Poco a poco (talk) 12:35, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:51, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the denoise wasn't as good as it could be Ermell and Poco a poco. New, slightly lighter, version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Looking better to me, thanks, Support Poco a poco (talk) 20:24, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Thank you for the new version. --Aristeas (talk) 15:28, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 16:31, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hight EV, how a good practice please upload the version without noise reduction. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:16, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452410 07:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:21, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the new version. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:53, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 13:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support New version is better -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 05:57, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Ciconiidae (Storks)

File:Świętokrzyski Bridge (5950341919).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 18 May 2022 at 22:12:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Poland
Info created by Kuba Bożanowski - uploaded by Andrew J.Kurbiko - nominated by Andrew J.Kurbiko -- Andrei (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Andrei (talk) 22:12, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose description may be improved, sorry Ezarateesteban 23:15, 9 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Świętokrzyski Bridge in Warsaw is an adequate description to me. We see a couple of towers and a bunch of girders. And this is good as an abstract composition, but I haven't decided whether I consider it an FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ezarate: I agree the description was poor. That was in part because of an error which hid the name of the bridge. I've expanded it now. Does this change your vote? Thanks. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 14:58, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This is a great idea but for me it's one of these photos that would have to be roughly symmetrical in the lines and shapes, and the fact that it's a little off centre means it falls a little short to me Cmao20 (talk) 12:39, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support works for me. yes, would be better if it were symmetrical, but I appreciate the motif/effect. A question, though, near the top-left of the left tower one of the cables seems to just end in mid-air. What's going on there? What don't I understand about the construction? — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:57, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Take a look at File:Most Świętokrzyski 2013 (3).JPG for example. The cables end in black "knobs" near the towers. I think one of these is responsible for the illusion. --Cart (talk) 01:43, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Rhododendrites -- Radomianin (talk) 05:08, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Rhododendrites (“weak” per Cmao20’s points). --Aristeas (talk) 06:39, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451400 07:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Karelj (talk) 11:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 18:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Low wow factor. Not special enough in my view. Moreover, I agree that the very poor description "in Warsaw, Poland" is not acceptable for a FP candidate. -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose as per Cmao20. Yann (talk) 09:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, because I'd be satisfied to see this on the wall in a museum show. It was undoubtedly nominated because it is special as an abstract composition, and I find that it is. And by the way, abstract works don't have to be symmetrical. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:21, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose also as per Cmao20 --Stepro (talk) 09:43, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Rhododendrites.--Ermell (talk) 14:33, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 06:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Arcinella arcinella valves, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 May 2022 at 06:13:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Right valve
Left valve

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Chamidae
Info created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:13, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 06:13, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 16:34, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:05, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 07:20, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451056 07:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 10:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:50, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:47, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 16:02, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 17:31, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 20:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:29, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:58, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 17:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Shells#Family : Chamidae

File:Kobe 20120501 122412.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 07:04:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Macropodidae (Macropods)
Info created & uploaded by Ka23 13 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 07:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 07:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't mind the missing back of the large one, but the two feet in the upper right corner should be removed imho. --Stepro (talk) 09:32, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The crop of the animal doesn't work and the light seems dull. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles, good photo but not FP for those reasons Cmao20 (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Poor quality (not quite sharp at just 6.25 megapixels), poor lighting, poor framing (at least 2 animals cut off). Far from being among the very very very best we have. --Kreuz schnabel 10:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 17:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Beuk (Fagus sylvatica), zwellende bladknop. 24-04-2022 (d.j.b.).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2022 at 15:24:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Fagaceae
Info Swelling leaf bud of a Fagus sylvatica. Focus stack of 32 photos.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:24, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:24, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 16:37, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:12, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Again great work! There is a small technical bug at the top of the image, slightly to the left: A red cluster of pixels (Please see annotation). -- Radomianin (talk) 19:51, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. correction Thank you for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 05:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:15, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452479 23:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful colours; the bud seems to shine thanks to the contrasting background. --Aristeas (talk) 07:51, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The end of the bud is blurred and there are quite a few stacking errors. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:56, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:29, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Daniel Case (talk) 03:22, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:55, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:46, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Gynandromorph of Athyma inara Westwood, 1850 - Colour Sergeant.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 19 May 2022 at 20:18:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
Info First live record of gynandromorph Athyma inara inara Westwood, 1850 - Himalayan Colour Sergeant from Buxa Tiger Reserve, West Bengal, India. The sex-related traits of the gynandromorph of A. nefte inara examined in the study, show that all distinguishing characteristics (Forewing (Fw) cell streak, Fw spot beyond cell, Fw and Hw discal band) of the left wing are female (bright orange), while all those of the right wing are male. - created by Atanu Bose Photography - uploaded by Atanu Bose Photography - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 20:18, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very surprising to see. Is this a functionally hermaphroditic butterfly? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:06, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, gynandromorphism in butterflies can be due to double fertilization of a binucleate egg, with variety of combinations in the sex chromosomes, leading to both male and female characteristics in the same specimen. Technically, its not termed as hermaphrodite, but yes, their genitalia can have all kinds of combinations like only male, only female, or both male and female. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 05:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Oh interesting. There's also this one, which is the VI. That one is slightly sharper, but the white balance is off and it's slightly tilted. Neither is really up to FP standards for butterflies, but if this is indeed the first of its kind, that provides for some "wow" and educational value which may make up for it. Will need to come back to this. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:49, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452654 23:48, 10 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose nice colors, but also damaged wings. --Ivar (talk) 05:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment, well, it's a rare find. There is a fairly low chance that another live gynandromorph specimen with an intact wing of the same subspecies can be found again. So, most probably, this specimen is all Wikimedia Commons will have. -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 05:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A marvellous find, but a shame not to get enough in focus, especially the head. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:50, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I agree with Charlesjsharp but I consider the shot unusual and therefore extraordinary Poco a poco (talk) 18:55, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Per Poco --Llez (talk) 10:31, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 14:21, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Poco a Poco. --Aristeas (talk) 06:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:40, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Imperfect, but an amazing find Cmao20 (talk) 23:09, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Flawed and beautiful Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 06:54, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 11:25, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:28, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 21:46, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)

File:2022-02-27 Leichtathletik, Deutsche Hallenmeisterschaften 1DX 5389 by Stepro.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2022 at 02:35:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info Chiara Sistermann at the German indoor championships in athletics 2022. Created, uploaded and nominated by -- Stepro (talk) 02:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not sure about this photo but her facial expression makes it special to me. -- Stepro (talk) 02:35, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment It does, but could you describe the situation in your file description? Did she just win? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
If I remember correctly, she was just surprised that the pole fell after all. Stepro (talk) 05:11, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

If you're sure, add that to the description and I will support. As a counterargument to Charles' objection below, the "ABC Wide World of Sports" TV show's opening sequence has very famous footage for "...and the agony of defeat." This is a striking photo that deserves support, but only if the description can put it into context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I added it to description. Thanks, Stepro (talk) 20:35, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:40, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It might be special, but the wow is missing. -- -donald- (talk) 04:47, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like it. Tomer T (talk) 08:04, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very sympathetic, IMHO more interesting than many usual sports photos. --Aristeas (talk) 08:33, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 08:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:37, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 11:34, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Doesn't work for me - failure at sports is inevitable but an athlete sitting after trying a jump? The composition is not for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:48, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree with Charlesjsharp Poco a poco (talk) 18:49, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not a good composition. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 22:22, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Yes there is a kind of wow. It is a vey successfull image to a point rare enough to be remarkable. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:31, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !Voters here often complain about the non-expressions on athletes' faces in better composed pictures. I could see an editor at Sports Illustrated or some similar magazine picking this one over those pictures. Sports are about people, and the expressions on faces sometimes tells a better story than the accompanying action. Daniel Case (talk) 02:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451038 07:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Not outstanding for me, although it is good to see not only the winners --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:47, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 08:51, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Sports# Individual sports

File:Cadenas d'amour (Colmar).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 07:23:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Tools
Info created by Gzen92 - uploaded by Gzen92 - nominated by Gzen92 -- Gzen92 ^[discuter] 07:23, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Gzen92 ^[discuter] 07:23, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose My best to the happy couple, but not interesting enough to be an FP, in my opinion. I won't be surprised if others disagree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:16, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ikan. I think this kind of thing would need extraordinary light or an interesting background/composition to make it work (IMO). — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:08, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose I think it could work if the lock itself were a more elaborate or ornate motif Cmao20 (talk) 19:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Thank you for your remarks. Gzen92 ^[discuter] 07:53, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Танцюючі тополі.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 May 2022 at 08:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
Info Gentle evening sunlight in a riparian forest at the riverbank of the Southern Bug in the Buzk’s Gard National Nature Park, Mykolaiv Oblast, Ukraine. Created and uploaded by Vitalii Bashkatov – nominated by --Aristeas (talk) 08:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support A common criticism of landscape images nominated here is that the photographer has overprocessed them. Therefore, I would like to nominate this picture for a change ;–). It is a very atmospheric autumn scene, but IMHO at the same time very natural and realistic. I can almost feel the warm evening sun breaking through the thinning canopy of leaves and bathing the forest in golden light. The fact that there is a slight reduction of contrast in the upper left (almost inevitable due to technical reasons) is not a fault: it contributes significantly to the sunny mood of the picture. --Aristeas (talk) 08:19, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:28, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support some may call it ordinary but I've always admired sunlight filtering through woods. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Aristeas. The way you can zoom in and not see any sort of compression makes it seem as if you could look at this image forever and continue noticing things. This image is amazing, how did it go two years on commons without even being nominated for anything? Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk

Lallint, it's great that you are enthusiastic, but please don't use that double symbol. The Bot won't be able to read it and your vote may not be counted. Please use the normal {{s}} and all will be well. --Cart (talk) 14:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, done Lallint⟫⟫⟫Talk

Support Ok for me. --Milseburg (talk) 13:20, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry but my brain is revolting against the washed out shadows. A scene like this should be more punchy, imho. -- KennyOMG (talk) 17:13, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice, but, please, check the tilt, the pond in the middle is tilted, water would flow down to the right Poco a poco (talk) 18:50, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you for the hint! However, I understand the picture differently: I believe that this is a stream that actually flows to the right (towards the river Southern Bug) and that its streambed is just largely hidden by the somewhat sloping banks and is only visible in the centre of the picture. Therefore I think there is no tilt. --Aristeas (talk) 06:46, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I see, ok, I cannot discard that possibility Poco a poco (talk) 08:20, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom, Poco, et al. Good composition, pleasant. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:44, 11 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:50, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:50, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:42, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:27, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:10, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:55, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Some of my best memories of hiking are in situations like this, days where it's clearly fall now but the leaves want to remind you of the summer that was, an evening you must await to see glorious the day truly was, so to speak. Well captured. Daniel Case (talk) 03:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451648 07:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:28, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:42, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:10, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Eurasian coot (Fulica atra) with chicks.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 13:46:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Rallidae (Coots, Rails and Crakes)
Info One FP of a chick standing on its own. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:46, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 17:20, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 03:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 09:47, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 14:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 18:56, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Poco a poco (talk) 16:49, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family : Rallidae (Coots, Rails and Crakes)

File:Lilly Walleni in Daria at Kungliga Operan 1907 - SMV - NV059.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 18:06:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People#People_at_work
Info created by Anton Blomberg - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:06, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Were the hands cropped in the original? Seems a strange composition if so. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:19, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
It's possible it was intended to be cropped higher - that's the point where the negative cuts off, but a lot of the things from this era got secondarily cut for print. See TIFF. I don't like to crop too much of a person. Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree you shouldn't do any cropping. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Given there isn't an exact edge to a negative like this - it's progressively more and more damaged at the edges (especially the right edge on this one), so any crop is somewhat of a judgement call - I'd say that this includes (more or less) all usable parts of the original negative. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:48, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Yann (talk) 16:12, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 09:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:40, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 15:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 17:22, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:44, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Mating posture of Ampittia dioscorides (Fabricius, 1793) – Bush Hopper DSC 1041.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 16:24:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Hesperiidae (Skippers)
Info created by Rahulbiswas29 - uploaded by Rahulbiswas29 - nominated by Bodhisattwa -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Bodhisattwa (talk) 16:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The noise reduction has not been executed very well - lot of work needed and less saturation too. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:18, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles, pretty picture but at full res lots of things don't look quite right, selective blurring of the background leaves some areas still looking noisy and the transition between blurry and sharp but noisy is too obvious. Cmao20 (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 15:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Yann (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Peacock Dancer with Body Art -2.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 15:20:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by TAPAS KUMAR HALDER - uploaded by TAPAS KUMAR HALDER - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 15:20, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 15:20, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 15:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:22, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 16:55, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very cool and I think it would have appealed to a Beaux Arts aesthetic. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive, inspiring and beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 19:41, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:08, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Something out of the ordinary.--Peulle (talk) 10:54, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very unique. NightWolf1223 (talk) 02:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 08:17, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 08:54, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Stepro (talk) 09:40, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:58, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Argenberg (talk) 15:12, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 17:20, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan, very nice Cmao20 (talk) 19:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:40, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Interesting to have a female dancer in the plumage of a male bird. Daniel Case (talk) 15:24, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:46, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 23 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:46, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Watzmann mit Schönfeldspitze.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 17:13:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Bavaria
Info The Watzmann in the Berchtesgaden Alps, seen from north. On the left in the background the Schönfeldspitze. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 17:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 17:13, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I picture I've always wanted to take myself --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 05:53, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Very nice scenery, fog, and colors. However, I'm not sure I like the composition; it seems that the mid-foreground does not have any elements connecting it to the rest of the image. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:41, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support good composition for me --Stepro (talk) 09:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:46, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:57, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 17:21, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:06, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support There's a lot that's good about this photo, and if there's any doubt, the labeling puts it over the top. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:03, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'd love to use this photo for my wallpaper ;-) --SHB2000 (talk) 08:17, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 14:26, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:54, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 21:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Menjemur Kerupuk Ikan.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 21 May 2022 at 08:27:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food : Processing, preparing and cooking
Info created & uploaded by Herusutimbul - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 08:27, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 08:27, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Amazing patterns, just the right light --Kritzolina (talk) 18:38, 12 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Unfortunately tilted but I don't recommend to fix the horizontal because the quantity of pans visible in the angles would be reduced. Striking view -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:26, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:48, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Kritzolina. --Aristeas (talk) 06:41, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:46, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:37, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:12, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 02:16, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Basile Morin Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 06:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451371 07:32, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose Nice, but I don't understand why it had to be a 6 mpix photo from an 18 mpix camera. --A.Savin 12:52, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another National Geographic-level image. Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Daniel. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:57, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:05, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Karelj (talk) 12:58, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:32, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Food : Processing, preparing and cooking

Monsoon in the Western Ghats

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 00:57:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Western Ghats near Matheran, Maharashtra (May 28, Dry season)
Western Ghats near Matheran, Maharashtra (August 28, Monsoon season)

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Weather
Info created and uploaded by Arne Hückelheim - nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:57, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 00:57, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If there were QI sets, this would pass easily, and both these photos are likely to be good VIs if nominated, but to me, the fact that both images are hazy (which I think is more reasonable for the rainy season one) makes this not have wow. Compare some of User:Basile Morin's images of the rainy season in Laos to see why, while these are good pictures and a good series that I like, they are not among the very best images of their type on Commons. I do understand why this was nominated; I thought of the idea, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:11, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Great idea for a set, but there's some very obvious cloning in the lower corners of the green image. Once you know it's there, you can even see it from the thumbnail. --El Grafo (talk) 07:11, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Yeah, I see that. That's not good. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:00, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

It's also present in the dry image too in the exact same spots. MER-C 18:29, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment For me the wow comes from the juxtaposition of the two images, and I like the set very much. However, as El Grafo pointed out, there is noticeable cloning on the green image, and unfortunately such a large area isn't exactly something you can fake. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 21:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:باغ فتح اباد.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 18:15:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Iran
Info created and uploaded by Ebi.eftekhari - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 18:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 18:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Has wow, but why is the ground floor less sharp than the 2nd floor? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:05, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The gate in the centre is unusually less sharp than the rest (so much so that the reflection of it seems sharper?), but for me the scene makes up for it. Would love to hear what other, more experienced voters have to say. -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment it's really as if bits of the reflected centre area were used to patch the actual centre. Strangely also more noisy than the surroundings. - Benh (talk) 13:44, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Very nice motif and colours but IMO too much of it is out of focus for FP Cmao20 (talk) 19:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose per Cmao. Daniel Case (talk) 19:13, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- IamMM (talk) 21:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Schachbrett (Melanargia galathea) im FFH-Gebiet "Sandgebiete zwischen Mannheim und Sandhausen" 17.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 12:55:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Nymphalidae_(Brush-footed_Butterflies)
Info created by Ssprmannheim - uploaded by Ssprmannheim - nominated by Ssprmannheim -- Ssprmannheim (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ssprmannheim (talk) 12:55, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support even despite noise --A.Savin 13:14, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:06, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 22:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Over-sharpened~~ -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support the new version. Very nice composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support It may be not technical perfect, but has a "wow" for me. --Stepro (talk) 09:35, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 11:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:55, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per A.Savin. --Aristeas (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Regretful oppose per Basile. Support Better now Daniel Case (talk) 03:10, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I also believe that the processing could be better (a shame!) but still a FP-worthy candidate in my eyes Poco a poco (talk) 16:49, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
new version I uploaded a new version with selective noise reduction and a little bit less sharpened. I hope you like it more now. --Ssprmannheim (talk) 21:43, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, much better. Review amended. Also notifying Daniel Case -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:17, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 06:00, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Nymphalidae_(Brush-footed_Butterflies)

File:2022-05-13 Bahnradsport, Steherrennen, Sparkasse Steher Grand Prix 1DX 8860 by Stepro.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 09:27:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports
Info panned shot; created, uploaded and nominated by -- Stepro (talk) 09:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Stepro (talk) 09:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Unfortunately the shutter speed was too low to freeze the cyclist's movement. Background is distracting too, especially the dark top of a stand. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Also makes me dizzy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:49, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Bad crop at the bottom. Intrusive line -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. Daniel Case (talk) 03:04, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:57, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ankara asv2021-10 img73 Republic Museum.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 12:33:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Turkey
Info Interior of the Republic Museum, Ankara -- this is the former plenary hall of the Grand National Assembly of Turkey, from 1924 to 1960. All by me --A.Savin 12:33, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:33, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 15:01, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Looking at the corresponding category it is obviously a valuable image, however the perspective is a bit disturbing, as well as the part of the balcony at bottom right. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:21, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I prefer this to a central perspective Cmao20 (talk) 23:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I'm with Christian here, the image looks unbalanced to me and the crops are difficult Poco a poco (talk) 11:07, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452572 07:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco. Daniel Case (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I've gone back and forth on this, but I want to show it a little love. It's a very interesting room, and I don't want FPC to demand straight-on, symmetrical views all the time. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:18, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Poco. -- Karelj (talk) 13:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 9 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Aristeas (talk) 16:58, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Iglesia de San Julián, Setúbal, Portugal, 2021-09-09, DD 62-64 HDR.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 22 May 2022 at 21:00:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
Info Church portal of St.Julian's Church, in Portuguese "Igreja de São Julião", located on the centric Praça de Bocage (town hall quare), Setúbal, Portugal. The church was originally built in the second half of the 13th century in medieval style and was rebuilt at the beginning of the 16th century by order of King Manuel I in Manueline style. In 1531 a strong earthquake struck Setúbal and the church was damaged; the building was considerably modified in Mannerist style and reinaugurated in 1570. The original church was almost completely destroyed by the Great Earthquake of 1755 and was greatly rebuilt and redecorated in the last third of the 18th century following the late Baroque style. From this stage date the general appearance of the façade, the inner wooden roof, the painted tiles, the main and lateral altarpieces and the main chapel. Today it is the main church (matriz) of the city classified as National Monument in 1910. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 21:00, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the interesting history. Very striking photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:14, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan and excellent image quality Cmao20 (talk) 23:15, 13 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 02:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 06:03, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 08:44, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 13:52, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Wouldn't the door look better if lightened? Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:02, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Well, I don't feel to be the right person to answer that, rather the heritage responsible in the city council, but I consider the portal around the door much more interesting and ornamental (and probably worthy in terms of legacy) than the door itself. There is not much texture in the door, that's probably the reason why they didn't focus there, and the few features of the door are already subtle lit and can be perceived IMHO Poco a poco (talk) 17:59, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Too dark, it might have helped to use a Maglite or similar, to put some additional light on the door. --A.Savin 19:41, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No, sorry, not an option to me adding on my own any additional lighting to get some areas more lit. Please, assess the image the way it looks in reality. If I add a maglite by myself I could understand that some reviewers opposed because of manipulation. Poco a poco (talk) 20:19, 14 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
ok so if you add flash, it's a manipulation? What about all the underwater pics you take with flash then? Benh (talk) 09:24, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's a different animal, Benh. If I light a scene underwater or push the luminance bar to the top during processing I'm not changing the composition. If I add a light to the door it does. That would be a change of the apperance, a change of the ornamental view of the portal. That's at least the way I see it. Poco a poco (talk) 09:38, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The title leads me to conclude it's an HDR photo, so you have already manipulated reality haven't you? I downloaded your image then reduced shadows and highlights in Photoshop and I liked the result. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:42, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Like Alexander says below, it's the same. You are (quoting you) "adding additional lighting to get some areas more lit". As long as u don't par away too far from reality, it's fine in my view. Sometimes it even gets you closer to what your eyes can actually see. - Benh (talk) 15:37, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Artificial light (be it the exterior illumination of a structure, flashlight of a camera, or anything else) is always a manipulation of reality, if you like. However I don't see any problem about it. --A.Savin 12:35, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:14, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451532 07:33, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too dark, IMHO, adding a bit of dynamic range would help make this look less dark. Such an alteration should be acceptable. It's just my opinion and I'm not necessarily right. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Has sort of a horror-movie quality to it. Daniel Case (talk) 02:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Wilfredor. -- Karelj (talk) 13:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:42, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 04:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Doors

File:Kirchwarft (Hallig Hooge)-msu-2021-9297-9509.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 19:01:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Germany
Info I found this when looking through WLM winners, and found it dramatic, striking and with nice colours. created by Matthias Süßen - uploaded by Matthias Süßen - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:01, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Excellent motif. I find the leaning houses on the left very disturbing.--Ermell (talk) 20:27, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment thanks for the hint. I uploaded a new version. --Matthias Süßen (talk) 12:30, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Now it's a FP. Thanks.--Ermell (talk) 13:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the edited version. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thank you very much for the new version, Matthias! --Aristeas (talk) 18:58, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 19:33, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:51, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:22, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although there is some tilt in ccw direction Poco a poco (talk) 16:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment Thx. I‘ll fix this on monday. -Matthias Süßen (talk) 07:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 01:24, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Weißdornblüte Crataegus monogyna -20220509-RM-104145.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 20:39:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Rosaceae
Info Hawthorn blossom. Focus stack of 30 frames. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:43, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:37, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:08, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Like a beautiful sculpture. --Aristeas (talk) 19:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:04, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:27, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:37, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:10, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

Sacred Heart Church, Wimbledon, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 19:00:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

Looking towards the altar
Looking towards the organ

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#London
Info Two views in opposite directions of Sacred Heart Church in Wimbledon, an interesting example of decorated Gothic revival given the Diliff treatment. I could add the sanctuary which seems like an FP as well to me but wasn't sure whether that would really fit into the set - thoughts? created by Diliff - uploaded by Diliff - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 19:00, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I don't think the closeup of the sanctuary fits in this set. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very good. (The closeup of the sanctuary is excellent, but IMHO it’s rather a photo on its own and would not fit well into this set.) --Aristeas (talk) 19:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the feedback on the sanctuary Ikan Kekek, Aristeas; I shall nominate it but not as part of this set Cmao20 (talk) 23:00, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support for this set. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:28, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:36, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:53, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 11:09, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wilfredor (talk) 15:38, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I half expect a church in Wimbledon to have a grass floor with white lines ... Daniel Case (talk) 17:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:20, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sumpfohreule (asio flammeus) - Spiekeroog, Nationalpark niedersächsisches Wattenmeer.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2022 at 14:40:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Strigidae (True Owls)
Info created & uploaded by Ssprmannheim - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 14:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 14:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose If it had been sharp it would have been a perfect photo.--Ermell (talk) 18:49, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Ermell. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Gorgeous thumbnail, but oppose per Ermell. Still a valuable document for small display -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose particularly per Basile, this is a good photo but just not sharp enough Cmao20 (talk) 14:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination Tomer T (talk) 16:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:John Campbell Dancy, Recorder of Deeds, Washington, D.C..jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 18:18:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait
Info created by Turner, restored by Adam Cuerden, uploaded by Adam Cuerden, nominated by Yann
Support -- Yann (talk) 18:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks for the nomination! It's appreciated! Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:20, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:29, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:56, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good photo, important person in American history. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:25, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:48, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 05:52, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:44, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:41, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Peulle (talk) 09:26, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 16:48, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Masai Mara National Reserve 20 - Mara river crossing.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 17:35:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Equidae (Equids)
Info created & uploaded by Snowmanstudios - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 17:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 17:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:54, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 21:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Remarkable photo to me. Good find! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:13, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Super action photo but the cropped zebra is distracting. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:48, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:20, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:20, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support UnpetitproleX (Talk) 01:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 05:10, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:48, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:42, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Peulle (talk) 09:26, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:52, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree with Charles but really striking -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hulged (talk) 08:18, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 18:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals#Family : Equidae (Equids)

File:Oroblanco (sweetie) fruits.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 16:39:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
Info all by Ivar (talk) 16:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support !! -- Radomianin (talk) 18:09, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support there is a small purple spot above the entire fruit, sorry the tool to add notes don't works anymore for me. Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:41, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed, thanks. --Ivar (talk) 18:45, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:43, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Another great photo in this series. These are really some of the best FP/QI/VI photos. Please nominate them all to com:vic, or maybe I will get around to that. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:15, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek please, be my guest, since I'm not active at VIC. --Ivar (talk) 15:01, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support, though would a second cut to show the seeds have been a good idea as well, think you? More an idea for next time; this is certainly the more æsthetic cut. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:49, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:49, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:37, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:53, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)

File:Renfe Mercancías 333.338 Samper de Calanda - Central térmica de Andorra.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 16:36:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles
Info created & uploaded by David Gubler – nominated by Ivar (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ivar (talk) 16:36, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The dramatic sky makes the picture perfect. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:12, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 18:42, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Radomianin. --Aristeas (talk) 19:01, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 19:59, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:54, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Excellent. The train coming at us out of that dramatic sky really makes for a memorable photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:50, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:18, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support UnpetitproleX (Talk) 01:12, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - The dark sky creates an interesting contrast. —Bruce1ee^talk 05:39, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:29, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:38, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 13:07, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:14, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:42, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:31, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Vehicles/Land_vehicles#Rail_vehicles

File:Chestnut-headed bee-eater (Merops leschenaulti) Yala.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 27 May 2022 at 22:44:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Meropidae (Bee-eaters)
Info No FP of this species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:44, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 23:19, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 23:35, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 03:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:30, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 07:26, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Background might be a little distracting, but that's the bird's habitat, and it's a pretty bird. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:29, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:42, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 17:24, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 05:32, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 16:41, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ikan. Daniel Case (talk) 16:51, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452991 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--Ivar (talk) 06:12, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Chorizos-asador.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 May 2022 at 19:40:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food : Processing, preparing and cooking
Info all by me Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 19:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ezarateesteban 19:40, 15 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - Likely a useful image, but there technical/"wow" parts are not quite there for me. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:07, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support For my part I like it -- it's appetizing, unusual, and has good quality. Hope our Muslim and Jewish colleagues are not offended here --A.Savin 13:22, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Unusual, interesting and educational --Kritzolina (talk) 18:37, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This feels like the prototype Wikipedia image: It is indeed unusual, interesting and educational. It is also mostly fine technically. But photographically speaking, it is just a straight snap shot with the primary compositional idea being to fill the frame with as much of the subject as possible. VI, maybe QI, possibly Wikipedia FP, but no Commons FP for me. --El Grafo (talk) 08:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:15, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose like El Grafo --Stepro (talk) 09:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others, very illustrative but IMO the image quality is not there. Cmao20 (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Far too noisy even if it were aesthetically striking enough. Daniel Case (talk) 16:55, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see noise in the picture Ezarateesteban 17:13, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Me too would be curious to know where noise is. --A.Savin 18:45, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the picture noisy at first glance as well, but then realized that it is the hot air from the fire that is creating these effects. Could it be that this is also what you see as noisy, Daniel Case? Kritzolina (talk) 06:02, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Kritzolina, Ezarate, A.Savin I can see it and I think it's a bit of both. There's certainly some heat involved in the centre, but that does not explain the slightly strange look of the grass or the sausage surfaces, for example. Feels like a bit too much de-noising being countered by a bit too much sharpening (or the other way round). You can see that quite well when zooming in to the face of the log on the left: The fine details get a bit fuzzy with some of the flatter areas in-between being almost posterized. That alone probably would not keep me from supporting, though. El Grafo (talk) 10:45, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support I looked at this picture several times and each time I find it more interesting. There is wow for me. -- IamMM (talk)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 6 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 22:18, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Відьомські пороги на світанку.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 06:57:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
Info created and uploaded by Vian - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 06:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:57, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but more categories are needed (e.g. sunrises, rapids). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:15, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very dramatic.--Ermell (talk) 10:41, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Ermell. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:00, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 13:18, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 13:19, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Fischer.H (talk) 15:13, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 15:31, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Excessive artificial vignetting, over-processed -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:37, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulcan❯❯❯Sphere! 04:04, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive. Sure, a lot of post-processing - but that's ok here in this case --Martin Falbisoner (talk) 06:38, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:39, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This type of shot basically requires relatively strong processing if you want to get even remotely close to a first-hand experience. That is difficult to get right and in the past we've seen many people going totally overboard with this. For a while, it seemed FP had developed a collective allergy against any kind of HDR-y landscapes and vignetting. But different styles of photography are useful for different things, and even in an educational context it is sometimes necessary to address the emotional side of things. It seems we're opening up a bit in that direction, and I'm glad about that.

Personally, I think I'd also prefer the vignetting to be dialed down a bit. But as it serves a purpose and is much less apparent in the full size view (our thumbnailer tends to exaggerate these kinds of things), I'm fine with it as an artistic choice. --El Grafo (talk) 07:59, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support per Martin and El Grafo. --Aristeas (talk) 08:36, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 08:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I agree there should be a place for digitally enhanced art works with vignetting and colour manipulation, but the file description should say this and use the appropriate template. The category is wrong as it states 'natural' which is misleading. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
FWIW, "Natural" is a misleading term anyway. There's hardly any place left on earth that has not been affected by human activites in one way or another [6], probably none if you consider climate change (well, maybe the deep sea). Some of the most species rich habitats existing in Europe today never would have developed without humans cutting down the trees so their livestock could graze. Now we turn them into nature reserves. "Nature" is an illusion - or at least highly subjective, as is can mean nothing, everything, and anything in between. El Grafo (talk) 09:17, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Not even the deep sea. They've found microplastics in the Marianas Trench. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:35, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:52, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 12:56, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support a bit dark, but lot of wow - Benh (talk) 13:50, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Basile. --Ivar (talk) 15:07, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 17:23, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Purely artistic photo but a good one Cmao20 (talk) 19:08, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:39, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks like a painting. Daniel Case (talk) 17:06, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452603 00:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 24 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Estrella roja del Mediterráneo (Echinaster sepositus), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2020-07-31, DD 110.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2022 at 13:07:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Asteroidea
Info Mediterranean red sea star (Echinaster sepositus), Arrábida Natural Park, Portugal. Apart from the red star you can also appreciate trumpet anemones (Aiptasia couchii) on the top right and at the bottom left corners, along with colorful seaweed (Dictyota dichotoma) on the top center or feces of sea cucumber (Holothuria sp) at the bottom left, among others. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 13:07, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 13:07, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:28, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice photo of the sea star. The white-tentacled creature on the right is also clear enough to merit a mention and a category, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:43, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ikan Kekek: Done, I ided some species, among them the trumpet anemones you mentioned, of which we have this FP. Poco a poco (talk) 20:21, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 19:05, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 20:48, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 21:42, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Hulged (talk) 08:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 17:25, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:24, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:50, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:48, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452467 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals#Class_:_Asteroidea

File:Tongerense Heide, (Veluwe). 30-08-2021. (actm.) 06.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 15:29:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Pinaceae
Info Irregularly shaped Pinus sylvestris on a rough moor.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:42, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose A tree with cut branch, unexceptional content to me. Boring sky -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:25, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I understand the objection, but somehow I am nevertheless impressed by that tree, exactly because of its broken branch – this tree stands like a brave veteran in its place. The cloudy sky is not that dramatic, but very apt as a background drapery for the tree. --Aristeas (talk) 14:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:03, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the big wall of cloud behind the tree somehow Cmao20 (talk) 19:11, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support impressive shot of damaged nature --Kritzolina (talk) 19:16, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 03:31, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 09:38, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:32, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support I admit I had to look at this for a little bit. But I came to like the way that bite out of the sky at upper right sort of mirrors the damage to the tree. And the whole thing makes you curious: What happened to the tree? Why is it on its own out here and not in the background with the others? Daniel Case (talk) 03:14, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Сurving branches and curving clouds work as one overall composition. Great shooting moment and the Аuthor's unusual ability to see beauty in simple things -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:47, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451727 00:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:NGC 2014, NGC 2020 - HST - Heic2007a.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2022 at 21:33:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Astronomy#Nebulae
Info created by NASA/ESA - uploaded by Fabian RRRR - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 21:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 21:33, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support JukoFF (talk) 00:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This looks really fantastic at full size on my 23.5-inch monitor, and I have the feeling that if I had another monitor twice as big, it would look even more awesome. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:11, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cbrescia (talk) 03:19, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 05:34, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hulged (talk) 08:15, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 12:11, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 17:26, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 17:57, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Really fascinating. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:44, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:20, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:06, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:41, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:06, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:39, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451410 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Astronomy#Nebulae

File:Otto von Friesen - Runsten Sö 113 Kolunda, Stenkvista socken - Alvin record 110815.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 25 May 2022 at 23:40:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Monuments and memorials
Info created by Otto von Friesen - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:40, 16 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good sharp photo, perfect restauration. At the first glance the photo is somewhat odd – the beautiful old runestone between a cropped tree trunk, a pot (?) and parts of farm (?) buildings ;–). But somehow I like the photo for that oddity – it shows how that runestone then was just a part of everyday reality, not a museum exponate. --Aristeas (talk) 19:06, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The category looks wrong; historical picture before 1600? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
@Ikan Kekek: The Runestone's from about 1000 A.D. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:59, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

But it's not a picture, and the picture isn't that old. I guess I'm misunderstanding the intended meaning of this category. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:14, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Honestly, it's really, really hard to know where to categorise it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 05:56, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Being the current “housekeeper” of the gallery pages, I like to add my 50 cent ;–). We usually put Adam’s excellent restaurations of old portrait photographs into the Portrait gallery page, i.e. we handle them just like contemporary photos. Per analogy this would mean that we should handle this historical photograph like a modern photograph of that runestone, because it’s a photograph (and not a painting, drawing, etc. which would go into some of the Non-photographic media galleries). So I would put the runestone photo either into the Sculptures#Other gallery or into the Other objects in landscapes gallery … depending on the disputed question whether a runestone is a sculpture or not (for me, it is ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:03, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Aye, that's the problem: It's not exactly a sculpture, but it's not exactly not one. This one was atop a burial mound, so maybe it counts as a gravestone.... but does that help us at all? Adam Cuerden (talk) 09:58, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Gravestones would usually be considered a type of sculpture, I think, unless they were mere markers. Was the shape of the runestone culturally significant, and did it vary much? By the way, the reason I haven't voted is that I haven't been able to decide how to vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:34, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

As a Swede with some knowledge of our runestones, I'll add a few words. They are almost always erected in honor of someone. (See article Runestone) They are not grave stones, but Viking monuments. The texts on them are variations of "XX erected/carved this stone after/in memory of warrior/son/husband/battle/whatever..." The correct gallery is Monuments and memorials, where dolmens, pyramids, etc. are kept. Now fixed. --Cart (talk) 10:40, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I think this one comes closer to grave marker than most - being believed to have sat atop a burial mound, although it all being dug up mid-19th century by farmers limits knowledge. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:04, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There are many memorials that sits on top of graves, serving dual purposes. From the pyramids up to modern day Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. Runestones have also been moved about and repurposed, ever since they were made. Sometimes it's hard to know their original location. For our gallery system, it's fits best in the memorial section. --Cart (talk) 22:42, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Agreed. Also helps keep it with other runestones. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:12, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

And to answer Ikan's question, the shape is not that significant. They are usually sort of phallic, but it seems they took a good stone with an oblong shape and one relatively flat surface and carved the runes on it. Vikings on the Swedish mainland were carvers, not stonemasons, and the stones are made from hard durable stone. Picture stones are different since the are mostly found on Gotland and made of softer limestone (the bedrock of the island), which is easier to work. They are distinctly phallic in shape. --Cart (talk) 10:54, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thank you very much, Cart! It’s always great to profit from your knowledge and experience. Yes, Sculptures#Monuments and memorials is certainly the best place. --Aristeas (talk) 13:45, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:15, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cbrescia (talk) 03:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:38, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451741 00:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 7 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Monuments and memorials

File:William Harvey Carney by James E Reed - Restoration.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2022 at 21:57:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by James E. Reed - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:57, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:57, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good portrait of a Civil War hero. How big was the original print? Also, what did you change in restoring it? The original looks like it was in excellent condition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Not sure of size, but mainly just spot and dirt removal. It wasn't too bad. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:24, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 05:39, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 07:00, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Hulged (talk) 08:16, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:20, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:52, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 17:26, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Kritzolina (talk) 17:55, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:48, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:32, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:41, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:42, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451818 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Долгоносик Sitona Sp.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 29 May 2022 at 23:54:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods
Info Weevil Sitona Sp. / created by Andrei Savitsky - uploaded by Andrei Savitsky - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 23:54, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JukoFF (talk) 23:54, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Fascinating, but has some haloes? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:01, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Technically needs a huge amount of work. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:14, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

+1 -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:07, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Serious CA. Daniel Case (talk) 18:58, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Azulejo - The Ritz - Funchal 04.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2022 at 06:08:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Other
Info This azulejo shows the former rack railway "Caminho de Ferro do Monte" (Monte Railway) that operated between 1893 and 1943 in Funchal (Madeira). Next to it one of the famous basket toboggans, which are still a famous tourist attraction today. The motif of this azulejo on the facade of the Ritz Hotel in Funchal is very similar to a postcard motif from around 1900. Created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:08, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Llez (talk) 06:08, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:29, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 15:23, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:53, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:47, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:27, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:05, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 05:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:24, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:44, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:03, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451543 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:00, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 14 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Other

File:Evening at Flakstadpollen in Flakstad, Nordland, Norway, 2017 April.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2022 at 11:56:30 (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 Trying ice with a stick with older picture. Blue early spring evening moment at Flakstadpollen located at Flakstadøya island in Lofoten. Created, uploaded, nominated by Ximonic -- Ximonic (talk) 11:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ximonic (talk) 11:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Appeals to me.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:22, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 16:38, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Refreshing... in all sense of the word. ;o) Yann (talk) 17:59, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 18:24, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice composition --Virtual-Pano (talk) 18:46, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:47, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:47, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Famberhorst and Yann. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:18, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good DoF -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive. --Aristeas (talk) 05:44, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Gallery link fixed/refined – we have a special gallery page just for Norway. Your friendly gallery link service ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
O'h indeed. Thank you for service! Lots of fjords going on in Norway it seems. --Ximonic (talk) 16:31, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:26, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 14:04, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:43, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:02, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452896 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:06, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 21 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Natural/Norway#Northern Norway (Nord-Norge/Nord-Noreg)

File:Vermont State House Montpelier October 2021 HDR.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 26 May 2022 at 07:45:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United States
Info created by King of Hearts - uploaded by King of Hearts - nominated by King of Hearts -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:45, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite a nice photo of the Capitol in the least populous state capital in the U.S. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:13, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tranquil and beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 14:10, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Nothing wrong about quality & composition, but IMO still not wow'y enough for an FP. Maybe would have worked better as a drone shot, with more of the autumn flora visible. --A.Savin 14:48, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fairly straightforward photo but IMO clears the bar for FP, I like the muted colours to be honest Cmao20 (talk) 19:14, 17 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:48, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per A.Savin. -- Karelj (talk) 13:02, 18 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 04:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:21, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 10:35, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice building, nice surroundings, no disturbing elements (specially people), good compo and light. The wow is maybe limited but everything else overcompensates it Poco a poco (talk) 16:47, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support And per Ikan, isn't it just fitting that this is probably the smallest state capitol building in the U.S. as well? And so Vermont to have the autumn woods behind it! Daniel Case (talk) 02:58, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452208 00:39, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /George Chernilevsky ^talk 14:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Song sparrow in Prospect Park (93031).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2022 at 17:13:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passerellidae_(New_world_sparrows)
Info Song sparrow. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 17:13, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 18:47, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:56, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:46, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful. A plus for the image is the implied axial symmetry. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:22, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:23, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 05:44, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 06:48, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:28, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 14:47, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 17:36, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:01, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:28, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
New version uploaded - I cropped it a bit. Curious if others think it's an improvement. If I don't hear anything before the nomination closes, I'll revert back. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:22, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Makes little difference to me, FWIW. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Fine for me. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451524 00:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Crop works fine Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:02, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 11:39, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 01:00, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Passerellidae_(New_world_sparrows)

File:Iglesia de Nuestra Señora de la Alegría, Furnas, isla de San Miguel, Azores, Portugal, 2020-07-29, DD 81.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 09:55:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Portugal
Info Church of Nossa Senhora da Alegria, Furnas, São Miguel Island, Azores, Portugal. The construction of the temple, nowadays the parish church of Furnas, started in the beginning of the 20th century but was not completed until the 1960s. The church, of Romanesque Revival style belongs to the Diocese of Angra. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 09:55, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 09:55, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Strong distortion, and the side in shadow. Yann (talk) 18:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Yann. Daniel Case (talk) 06:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Ok, I see, the excitment about the image is limited. I withdraw the nom. Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Poco a poco (talk) 10:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Kloster Anhausen-msu-2021-0633-.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 09:53:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info Renomination - the author has now fixed the cloning error that caused me to withdraw this last time. As before, an atmospheric and beautiful photo of a ruined monastery. created by Matthias Süßen - uploaded by Matthias Süßen - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 09:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 09:53, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment much better than before, but there's still a very visible hard edge between sharp and out-of-focus grains at the bottom (see image note). The size of neighboring grain ears also does not match in that area. --El Grafo (talk) 10:23, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- CommentHi El Grafo. thx for the hint. Unfortunately I am on the road and do not have access to the raw file. I could crop the photo at the bottom. --Matthias Süßen (talk) 10:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per El Grafo, but I really don't feel this image has wow. Daniel Case (talk) 02:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination I still love this photo and I think it should be an FP, we will try again when everything is fixed and I'm sure we'll get it right in the end. But this is clearly going nowhere. Cmao20 (talk) 18:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--Cmao20 (talk) 18:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Boris Kustodiev - Shrovetide - Google Art Project.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 5 Jun 2022 at 16:07:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Exteriors#Outdoor events
Info created by Boris Kustodiev/Russian Museum - uploaded by DcoetzeeBot - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 16:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 16:07, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I really like this painting, and this seems like a very good reproduction, but I'm unfamiliar with this artist's style and, particularly, his palette, so I'll defer to others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:34, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose According to several reproductions, including post stamps, the snow is white, not pink. White balance seems off. Too warm, IMO -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:41, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

At first glance, I had the same opinion but after further investigation I came to the conclusion that in the version of this work in the Russian Museum the Pinkish theme is part of the painting. Take a look at this picture taken in 2020. -- IamMM (talk) 06:32, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Same website, same caption, but white (Russian Museum) -- Basile Morin (talk) 11:57, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This one also looks too warm IMO, but I found this one that I think is better for judging. The faded pink color is still visible but I admit it looks exaggerated in the nominated image. -- IamMM (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination -- IamMM (talk) 12:28, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Buzzard - Flickr - Andy Morffew (1).jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2022 at 09:29:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus : Buteo
Info created by Andy Morffew - uploaded by Red panda bot - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 09:29, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Bottom half is a cloned background unfortunately. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question How can you tell? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Indeed I believe the whole background is fake. You can see it (apart from the missing portions that haven't been cloned out/replaced) in the unnatural transition from the eagle to the background Poco a poco (talk) 10:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Charles and Diego, you are both experienced and skilled wildlife photographers and I respect your judgment, but looking at the photographer's Flickr page I think he deserves the same attributes. I just can not understand why someone with such acceptable equipment and skills should put a fake background on the pictures. File:Buzzard - Flickr - Andy Morffew.jpg is another image of this bird, do you think there is a similar problem in it? -- IamMM (talk) 11:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry for your nom but I cannot accept this level of image manipulation (and on top without any mention of it). The image you link is also a fake, I added 2 notes, but that fake is better than this one, he put more effort there to make it look real Poco a poco (talk) 12:08, 26 May 2022 (UTC) PD: I left the author a message on Flickr.[reply]

The other picture has a replaced background too. Examine the sharp pixels at the transition from bird to background. Very obvious. For your interest, he has a picture of juvenile greenfinches on flickr with the very obvious addition of bright yellow. To be clear, we all post-process, but I believe there are limits to what we should do and then pretend it's original. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:31, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that we should give a reasonable limit to the post-process. It's a bit embarrassing for me that I can't distinguish fake background from real one so let me hope you both are wrong. :) I wish the photographer had a Commons account and could explain because it is still not clear to me why he should do it, it does not make sense. We have several FP from this photographer, including flying hummingbirds (File:Ensifera ensifera (22271195865).jpg and File:Sword-billed hummingbird (male) at Guango Lodge, Ecuador (21310837273).jpg) which I think are a harder subject than a bird perched on a tree. -- IamMM (talk) 15:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I still really can't tell. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Ensifera ensifera (22271195865).jpg appears to have a fake background. I didn't spot this during the voting process. File:Sword-billed hummingbird (male) at Guango Lodge, Ecuador (21310837273).jpg look OK. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:16, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Weird outlines visible with 300% magnification, above the wings at the top -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:19, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, I see them, too, at that magnification. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:20, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Excellent detail but the fake background is really obvious. Cmao20 (talk) 10:29, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Thank you all, this was an instructive nomination. I sent a message to the photographer informing him of the possibility of his images being challenged on Commons due to unannounced manipulation. -- IamMM (talk) 07:10, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
CommentIt's been run through a sharpening app. Look at the eye. When I image search for buzzard eyes they are excessively round and finely detailed. This birds eyes are like, grainy and completely irregular. Something similar is on the Village Pump right now. Also around the eye, see how it has blended the beak with the feathers and the feathers with the skin? And there are one or two other possible pointers but the eye, this birds eye is almost definitely not that lumpy shape. ~ R.T.G 13:05, 11 June 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Nanoart Africa.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2022 at 19:30:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects
Info created and uploaded by Яна Сычикова - nominated by IamMM -- IamMM (talk) 19:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Interesting, but no strong resemblance to Africa in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose "precisely replicates the outline of the African continent"? Oh no it doesn't. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Quality for a 350x magnification is great but I have indeed the impresion that some countries in the northeast like Egypt are missing. --Poco a poco (talk) 11:05, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Interesting idea but per Ikan looks nothing like Africa Cmao20 (talk) 10:30, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination -- IamMM (talk) 16:08, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Tonga Volcano Eruption 2022-01-15 0320Z to 0610Z Himawari-8 visible.gif

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2022 at 03:37:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animated
Info created by Japan Meteorological Agency - uploaded by HurricaneEdgar - nominated by HurricaneEdgar -- HurricaneEdgar 03:37, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- HurricaneEdgar 03:37, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This should be a video, not a GIF file. Yann (talk) 09:39, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

There is a gif which is nominated as featured picture candidates Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:2004 Indonesia Tsunami Complete.gif, i can't not uploaded in original becuase mp4 is not unacceptable so i convert to mp4 to gif. HurricaneEdgar 09:55, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, gif FPs do exist, but now they are very, very, contested at FPC. A lot has happened here since 2004. You might want to take a look at this nom: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Global Temperature Anomaly.gif, and how it developed into a video. If you go with the video format, you have to nominate it at COM:FVC since that's where videos and animation are these days. If you have a mp4 file, it can be converted to a format that works on Commons when you upload it, see Help:Converting video. --Cart (talk) 12:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Video alternative

Info @W.carter and Yann: This is now better? i convert to gif to webm. HurricaneEdgar 13:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's better, but as I said you can't nominate videos here, they branched off from this page a few years ago and are now at Commons:Featured media candidates. Please nominate it there instead. Good luck! --Cart (talk) 14:44, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Commons:Featured media candidates/File:Tonga Volcano Eruption 2022-01-15 0320Z to 0610Z Himawari-8 visible.webm HurricaneEdgar 15:02, 25 May 2022 (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: Video nominated at COM:FVC as it should be. --Cart (talk) 16:33, 25 May 2022 (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:Murga La Corre y Vuela en Encuentro de Murgas de Mujeres y Mujeres Murguistas edited.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 28 May 2022 at 07:47:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by Camilo Lopez-Moreira - edited and uploaded by Radomianin - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 07:47, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Impressive event (carnival) photo and portrait. I like the interplay of light and shadows, the colours, the gesture which speaks directly to me. For an event photo taken under difficult conditions the quality is good. There is some grain (which is just natural: the photographer had to use ISO 3,200), but IMHO a bit of grain is better than mush, and Radomianin (thank you very much for editing the photo!) has found a very good balance in reducing the grain and improving the colour balance. --Aristeas (talk) 09:31, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. The English-language description could use some tweaking; I may try my hand at that later, but it would be better for someone with a greater command of Spanish to have a look. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:59, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas. A bit of luminance noise is fine under these conditions, and I'd like to point out that there is practically to zero chroma noise (which would be much more annoying). --El Grafo (talk) 10:17, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 10:50, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Moody capture at the right moment; the grainy look adds a level of charm. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:44, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 17:22, 19 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 13:25, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support Am I the only one that finds noise level an issue? Around the mouth/mic is disturbing, but still great shot Poco a poco (talk) 16:39, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 21:42, 20 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:36, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cbrescia (talk) 03:19, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:51, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 17:32, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451961 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't like the noise and lack of detail. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:07, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:40, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Sweet granadillas (Passiflora ligularis) - whole and cross section.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 09:52:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Fruits (raw)
Info How about another of Ivar's high resolution focus stacks of fruits? created by Iifar - uploaded by Iifar - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 09:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 09:52, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support thank you for this nomination, Cmao. This is very tasty and juicy fruit. --Ivar (talk) 15:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support It does look juicy, yes --Kritzolina (talk) 17:46, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 20:17, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:45, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452614 00:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:44, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support That's lovely. You should bring it to en:WP:FPC too. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:29, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 21:09, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the way the seed pods look like something out of a sci-fi horror movie or something. Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:55, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 20 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 12:42, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Food and drink#Fruits (raw)

File:Flowerish Sunbird.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 10:33:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Nectariniidae_(Sunbirds_and_Spiderhunters)
Info created by Domzjuniorwildlife - uploaded by Domzjuniorwildlife - nominated by Rodrigo.Argenton -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 10:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- -- Rodrigo Tetsuo Argenton^m 10:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Domzjuniorwildlife (talk) 11:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:44, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451013 00:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I certainly will not oppose, and it's hard not to vote for - the bird is beautiful and sharp and the plant is beautiful. However, the crop is not ideal. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:19, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Agree on the crop, but it’s still so beautiful. --Aristeas (talk) 09:06, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support This could sell some fruit juice ... Daniel Case (talk) 06:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per Ikan Kekek Poco a poco (talk) 11:47, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 09:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:47, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Nectariniidae_(Sunbirds_and_Spiderhunters)

File:Marburg asv2022-02 img06 Reitgasse.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 12:21:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Windows
Info Exterior view of the N.G.Elwert university bookstore in Marburg, Hesse All by me --A.Savin 12:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --A.Savin 12:21, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Je-str (talk) 18:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Pretty bookstore, nice details and even a little humor (the "I am a book ~~hoarder~~ collector" bag). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451996 00:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:08, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful combination of the outside light with the warm lighting inside. --Aristeas (talk) 09:11, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:51, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support For once the tilt works -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The reflections are not a plus but hard to avoid and otherwise good quality and a very interesting subject Poco a poco (talk) 11:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 17:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 09:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:46, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Windows

File:Viperine water snake (Natrix maura).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 14:07:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles#Family : Colubridae (Colubrids)
Info No FPs of this species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:07, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ermell (talk) 20:40, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452230 00:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very nice thanks to the blue patches of sky reflection and the small waves. --Aristeas (talk) 09:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The blue patches almost work too well: I found them so fascinating I totally forgot about the snake for a while. --El Grafo (talk) 09:31, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas and El Grafo. -- Radomianin (talk) 14:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great composition, featured special background -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:46, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per others - yes, an excellent composition. Snake might be a bit sharper, and is the head a little oversharpened? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Close. The head was overexposed to get the water and body right and had to be recovered in post-processing. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:18, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Llez (talk) 07:32, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support To be honest I wouldn't have probably supported it if it had been a more common animal or a one laying on a rock. The image is small and I see no sharpness anywhere. Too much AI again in the head for my tast, looking unreal. On the other side a difficult shot of a rare scene, that makes it FP to me Poco a poco (talk) 11:40, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The blue patches make it. Daniel Case (talk) 22:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support The great background and the composition make it special. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:34, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 09:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Reptiles#Family : Colubridae (Colubrids)

File:Vogelmelk (Ornithogalum). Gesloten bloemknop. 01-05-2022 (d.j.b.) 01.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2022 at 15:33:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Asparagaceae
Info Ornithogalum Closed flower bud. Location. Garden sanctuary JonkerValley. Focus stack of 18 photos. The flower only opens in full daylight.
All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 15:33, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:36, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support, but a very subtle halo appears to be visible at full size on each side of the stem. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Halo removed. Thank you for your reviews.--Famberhorst (talk) 15:57, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ivar (talk) 11:32, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452318 12:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:43, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:36, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 22:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 09:28, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:26, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:04, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 16 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 23:17, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants/Asparagales#Family : Asparagaceae

File:Buller's Albatross - east of the Tasman Peninsula-crop.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2022 at 06:05:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Diomedeidae_(Albatross)
Info created by JJ Harrison – uploaded & nominated by Ivar (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 06:05, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Almost too sharp to believe. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support It is sharp, but the noise reduction has had to be severe. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:49, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Ermell (talk) 08:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --El Grafo (talk) 09:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Great – and unlike shooting the albatross “with my cross-bow” (1), shooting it with the camera does not bring bad luck ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 09:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:01, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451597 12:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Well frozen in flight -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:42, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:33, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 00:33, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Poco a poco (talk) 11:35, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:53, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 09:35, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:03, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 19 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:13, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds#Family_:_Diomedeidae_(Albatross)

File:Lythrum salicaria flowers - Kulna.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2022 at 06:10:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family_:_Lythraceae
Info all by – Ivar (talk) 06:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Ivar (talk) 06:10, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 06:35, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:37, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Quite beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:15, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 08:16, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:48, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 10:03, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:04, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451973 12:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:40, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 07:34, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:52, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ximonic (talk) 11:37, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:18, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 09:31, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:59, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:40, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:03, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Yann (talk) 15:12, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Plants#Family_:_Lythraceae

File:Spanish festoon (Zerynthia rumina).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2022 at 12:14:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Papilionidae (Swallowtails)
Info One of Europe's most beautiful butterflies. No FPs. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 13:52, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support However, a pixel seems to be burned on the left side. --Clément Bardot (talk) 14:30, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, spots of light are tiny insects/dust in the air. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:53, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452473 02:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 06:54, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 08:04, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 19:17, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice. I'm curious. I have never been to Plasencia or Trujillo (but I know Badjoz, Caceres or Merida) and I didn't know of any wildlife highlights in that area, is it worth a visit? what area specially? Poco a poco (talk) 11:22, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great for bird-watchers with scopes, but no cover so not so good for photographers. Salto Del Gitano, Cáceres would have been great with a bigger lens and if I had more skill in capturing birds in flight. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Ximonic (talk) 11:23, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:39, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 06:42, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 09:56, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 09:58, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support A little cluttered, but the detail makes up for it. Daniel Case (talk) 02:52, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:02, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:02, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Papilionidae (Swallowtails)

File:Kenje Ogata 1943.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2022 at 00:44:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info Unknown photographer; uploaded and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:44, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great story and an important one, but I'm not sure this is a great portrait, although it's certainly important as documentation. I don't love the right crop, and it's funny how his hat isn't on straight. His facial expression makes an impact, though, so I have to think about this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I withdraw my nomination Think it's clear this isn't passing. Adam Cuerden (talk) 03:19, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Elephant seals at Ano Nuevo (91615).jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2022 at 21:13:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Family_:_Phocidae_(Earless_Seals)
Info A few years ago I visited Ano Nuevo State Park in California, where there's an elephant seal rookery. It was a loud, dramatic spectacle, with absolutely massive males (up to 3700kg/8200lb) constantly barking and fighting each other. This photo captures a moment of exhausted rest for one of them, when it audibly crashed into the sand after one of several fights. You can see a bunch of the cuts/scrapes/scars from its conflicts. all by — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support — Rhododendrites ^talk | 21:13, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support I would have loved to see the rest of his body, but that's nitpicking. Quite a compelling image, IMO. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:25, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451689 00:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 08:05, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment The crop is not ideal and I would like more depth of field. I am guessing that the light was poor that day. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Charlesjsharp, how would “more depth of field” improve the image? --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:20, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment The feature of the image is said to be the cuts, but they are not in focus. Despite the implication from the description, these are not recent cuts, are they? Where's the blood? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:03, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Indeed, as a former frequent visitor to Año Nuevo, I remember much better examples of male individuals with cuts. Now, more depth of field is not going to fix that particular issue. It's more about photographing a different animal. With that being said, I would have used a narrower depth of field for this image. The way the picture is currently composed, the face of the animal is the main subject. And a narrower depth of field would have highlighted that. However, in the end it's the photographer's choice… --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:04, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Reading the description you made me want to see a shot of that wild fights amoung the seals, but ok, this one is nice, too Poco a poco (talk) 11:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Poco a poco, if you'd like to see wild fights, here's a video :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 16:07, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Cmao20 (talk) 09:56, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:35, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:54, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:26, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:06, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jumping spiders (Salticidae).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 3 Jun 2022 at 08:30:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Arachnida#Family_:_Salticidae_(Jumping_Spiders)
Info created by Ganjarmustika1904 - uploaded by Ganjarmustika1904 - nominated by GuerraSucia -- GuerraSucia (talk) 08:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- GuerraSucia (talk) 08:30, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Fun photo, but techically very weak. These spiders are often captive 'pets'. No idea if this one is. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:41, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question The quality is ok at lower resolution, but which species is it? -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:49, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charles. Insufficient quality for FPC because it doesn't wow (sufficient for QIC, where it passed). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:56, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 11:15, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others. Daniel Case (talk) 17:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /--A.Savin 11:34, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Черные чулки.tif, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2022 at 00:06:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing and textiles
Info Weaving nylon stockings under a microscope / created by Alexander Klepnev - uploaded by Alexander Klepnev - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 00:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- JukoFF (talk) 00:06, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment This TIF file is too heavy. Hard to open it without prior download. I think a JPG version would help -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:40, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative

Info JPG version, no further changes. If the preview looks different, that's because TIF and JPG get different levels of sharpening from the Mediawiki thubnailer. --El Grafo (talk) 08:42, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Absolutely fascinating, both aesthetically and on the subject level. If this appears soft to you while pixel-peeping, please keep in mind that the magnification in this one is far beyond a regular macro shot, where optics get tricky. I wish the description was a bit more in-depth, but all the WOW makes up for that in my book. --El Grafo (talk) 09:29, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Yann (talk) 18:37, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thanks to El Grafo for the JPG version -- IamMM (talk) 20:16, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per El Grafo, also valuable and a good VIC nominee. It would be nice to know how much magnification was applied. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:43, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451294 00:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Love it! --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:40, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 05:33, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 06:17, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per El Grafo – and thank you for the JPEG file! --Aristeas (talk) 07:56, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 17:46, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support As lovely a texture to look at as to touch ... Daniel Case (talk) 19:00, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

...but not to smell :-) Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:08, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:29, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 11:27, 30 May 2022 (UTC))[reply]

This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects#Clothing and textiles

The chosen alternative is: File:Черные_чулки.jpg

File:Little Shiva edited.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 30 May 2022 at 17:50:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events
Info created by Syed Mahabubul Kader - edited and uploaded by Radomianin - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Kritzolina (talk) 17:50, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Oppose~~ Nice subject, but strong artifacts. Yann (talk) 17:58, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Question Do you mean some posterization that's on the gray cloth in the background? Because the boy is made up, it's hard for me to tell what might be an artifact or color noise and what's just makeup. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:54, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

New version uploaded A great photo with strong FP potential. However, the technical quality is not perfect, but a challenge for image editing. The dark spots on the cloth behind the boy appear to be natural, my guess is some sort of mold stains, probably caused by storage in a moist place. The posterization, less prominent in the original, was probably caused more by my attempt to reduce some of the excessive, artificial vignetting. I have now reversed this editing step by 90 percent. As for the boy's face, there are clearly beads of sweat in addition to the heavy makeup. You can also see this in the trickle, starting at the neck. I hope the new version offers a slight technical quality improvement. Best wishes, -- Radomianin (talk) 20:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support Much better. Yann (talk) 11:12, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support In favor of the great subject, I am accepting the vignetting as an artistic stylistic element. -- Radomianin (talk) 20:05, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the impact it has on this viewer, but I understand it's definitely a debatable nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:47, 21 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose sorry, but the vignetting (and post-processing perhaps) creates an effect that's overall too artificial IMO — Rhododendrites ^talk | 01:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive. IMHO the strong vignetting is OK in this case because the photo shows a kind of staging of Indian religion/mythology. The boy personifies Shiva, so the “theatrical” effect of the vignetting puts him in the limelight in a fitting way and at the same time underlines that it is a staging. A nice distancing effect IMO ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 05:35, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Aristeas Cmao20 (talk) 14:49, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 18:03, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:37, 22 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:45, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Too artificial, especially the cloth background. Not wild on the vignetting either. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:36, 23 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452872 00:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 07:28, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Thought it was a painting at first. Looks like an album cover. Daniel Case (talk) 18:14, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral Per above, when looking at it it wasn't obvious to me whether it is a photograph or a painting Poco a poco (talk) 11:51, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 13 support, 2 oppose, 1 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:31, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Jasper Francis Cropsey by Napoleon Sarony.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2022 at 00:42:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
Info created by Napoleon Sarony - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:42, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good portrait of an important painter, excellent restauration. – I like the expressive way Cropsey looks to the side, his eyes probably fixed on something far away – very appropriate for a landscape painter ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:16, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support You have very good arguments. Maybe it took someone who's not the son of a painter to think of that. I suspect it was just a popular photography portrait style of the day, though.-- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:21, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Llez (talk) 05:15, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 07:14, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 19:34, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 01:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:24, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Cayambe (talk) 07:43, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 10 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /Ikan Kekek (talk) 11:04, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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

File:Anemone patens in Zhytomyr Oblast 2017-04.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 2 Jun 2022 at 09:14:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Ranunculaceae
Info created & uploaded by 84Human84 - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ -- Tomer T (talk) 09:14, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
~~Support~~ --El Grafo (talk) 09:22, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Great idea, but it doesn't quite come off, artistically or technically. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:34, 24 May 2022 (UTC)}[reply]

Possibly fake, like 1, 2, 3... but I can't say how far in this case -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:38, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose There should be a place for digital creations, but only if they are described as such. If the photographer can state this is genuine, I will remove my oppose. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:09, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose If such is the case, that this has gone through serious alterations or staging, it may not be fair to have it "competing in the league" with genuine photographs. I like this aesthetically, but digital art may be a topic worth discussing about, as I am one myself too, even if doing just paintings rather than "photos". I don't know what has happened, but may need a word from the creator to be clear. Genuine description needed, as I would also oppose a picture of wildlife taken in a zoo, if it isn't stated. --Ximonic (talk) 11:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 452495 12:20, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Ermell (talk) 20:24, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 20:47, 24 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Aristeas (talk) 06:13, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I would love to hear from 84Human84 about this (and other) images. Many of the others are obviously closer to "digital art" than "pure photography", which makes me more suspicious than I already was of this shot. I don't mean "digital art" negatively, necessarily, but the descriptions should be clear when scenes are staged or photos are composited/heavily edited. The images are impressive, either way -- I don't think staging or heavy editing should be disqualifying as long as it's in the description. Sometimes an image might be too contrived to serve much "educational use" but IMO there is a place for some such art among FPs on Commons. — Rhododendrites ^talk | 12:15, 25 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very impressive, beautiful, backlit and isolated subject. - Benh (talk) 03:30, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I cannot believe this is a the result of one shot, and as there is no information about that in the description, I consider it a fake. The area around the sun is full of water drops, either in the air or over a surface or even the lens. That's not the case in the bottom are, that's awkward. Poco a poco (talk) 11:32, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 12:17, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Please specify the manipulation or montage in the description page -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:35, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral pending resolution of the issues raised. Daniel Case (talk) 19:43, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Question Reading the views above, wouldn't it be right @Tomer T: to withdraw this nomination? Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:05, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I withdraw my nomination concern for undocumented manipulation. Tomer T (talk) 09:01, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

File:Iglesia de San Carlos Borromeo, Viena, Austria, 2020-01-31, DD 58-60 HDR.jpg, featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Jun 2022 at 12:58:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Austria
Info Detail of the dome fresco of St. Charles Church (Karlskirche), Vienna, Austria. The baroque church is dedicated to Charles Borromeo and is one of the city's biggest buildings. The fresco is a work of Johann Michael Rottmayr and Gaetano Fanti, which displays an intercession of Charles Borromeo, supported by the Virgin Mary. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 12:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 12:58, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --XRay 💬 19:50, 26 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Princess Rosalina 💄 451147 01:38, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful, unusual composition Cmao20 (talk) 10:25, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 11:51, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- IamMM (talk) 13:12, 27 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support--Llez (talk) 05:18, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support -- Johann Jaritz (talk) 06:00, 28 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Schnobby (talk) 06:21, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support per Cmao20. --Aristeas (talk) 08:18, 29 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support Daniel Case (talk) 18:30, 30 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Alex Florstein (talk) 06:53, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Confirmed results:

Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /--A.Savin 13:06, 31 May 2022 (UTC)[reply]

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