Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 08 2020

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Chiesa_di_Santa_Maria_in_Valtenesi_transetto_settentrionale_Manerba_del_Garda.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Internal view of the Santa Maria in Valtenesi church in Manerba. --Moroder 04:50, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --XRay 05:23, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Blown hightlights are disturbing IMO. --Ermell 10:16, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ermell Sebring12Hrs (talk) 20:48, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:26, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Hesperia_comma,_Hartelholz,_Múnich,_Alemania,_2020-06-28,_DD_141-151_FS.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Detail of the wing of a silver-spotted skipper (Hesperia comma), Hartelholz, Munich, Germany --Poco a poco 23:38, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 09:26, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose QI, this, seriously? --Basile Morin 04:37, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
    To my defense, those scales are 60 µm long... Poco a poco 07:06, 5 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sharpness is not too bad regarding the high resolution, at those image parts, where it is sharp. But rather strong noise, low contrast, low DOF. --Smial 08:48, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

File:White-rumped_Munia_13.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination White-rumped Munia in Kerala by Shagil Kannur -- Shagil Kannur22 July 2020
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Please provide a meaningful description of this file with geotag and taxa name --Moroder 06:25, 31 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Very good for me. -- Spurzem 07:02, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Image quality is o.k. for me, but there are issues here that must be dealt with. There is neither a description nor geotagging or at least anything about the location. Let's discuss. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 08:56, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. I have added a meaningful description; the picture was taken in Kerala, India, which I believe is a sufficient "location", since this bird is a common bird found all across India, and South-East Asia. --Johannes Maximilian 20:51, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Alright; this is acceptable for me. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 06:59, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now. If "White-rumped Munia in Kerala" is a sufficient location description, are you all OK with "Rock dove in England" or "Domestic cat in Greece"? I think more specificity should be provided even for common animals. I don't need geocoordinates or the name of the nearest village, but I think it would be reasonable to add the name of the district. -- Ikan Kekek 06:05, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 21:25, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

File:GIMS_2019,_Le_Grand-Saconnex_(GIMS0591).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination BMW 7 Series at Geneva International Motor Show 2019, Le Grand-Saconnex --MB-one 00:37, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:23, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose. For me this photo is not a quality image. The car is too dark in the front, there is too much light in the back and, above all, the light reflections on the body are extremely disturbing. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 10:34, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
  • I agree with Lothar Spurzem; in addition to that, the rear wheel is not really sharp, and the perspective is not ideal. --Johannes Maximilian 15:29, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Agree with Spurzem. Kallerna 19:13, 3 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:24, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

File:Белая_сова_близ_кордона_"Сомнительная".jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Bubo scandiacus, Wrangel island, Russia, by Miracles Observer --Ludvig14 20:59, 23 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --GRDN711 03:42, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
     Oppose Too noisy for me. -- Ikan Kekek 10:31, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
     Oppose noise --Charlesjsharp 13:33, 24 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support A bit noisy indeed. But a very beautiful and impressive image. -- Spurzem 17:18, 25 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Nice] --Moroder 07:30, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Ikan Kekek. --MB-one 17:15, 26 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. --Fischer.H 17:13, 29 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too noisy, sorry. --Johannes Maximilian 09:19, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 Comment Who thinks he must declare this image unusable, should try to take a photo comparable. -- Spurzem 10:21, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 Comment @Spurzem: there is supposed to be two days with no votes, and not a tie, before it gets closed.Seven Pandas 14:30, 1 August 2020 (UTC)
 Question Spurzem, do you make films? Do you criticize films? How about TV shows? You get where I'm going with this. Your argument is illogical. -- Ikan Kekek 14:47, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: Your question is illogical. For you take photos and you know how difficult it is to take a photo like that we discuss here. -- Spurzem 21:52, 2 August 2020 (UTC)
I actually do take a fair number of photos on my phone, and I know that they are not that good technically, but that's really beside the point, which you prefer to ignore. I don't appreciate your dishonesty. And you also ignore the fact that people who've participated in this thread have indeed taken very good bird photos. Unless you think Charles hasn't, for example. -- Ikan Kekek 06:11, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment It took me a week to share my opinions on whether this should be called a QI or not, because it's a bit tough. With an exposure of 0.0004 seconds, and ISO 5000, the image is really grainy. The focus and the view is marvelous, and the scene is almost perfect. The resolution is high enough to generate a sharp and low noise image of resolution above two or three megapixel with good software use. I would give it a weak support given the scenario, because the guideline on noise is a guide only. Still, I request the modification to be done in another version of this image, not this one.
  • Weak  Support because of the excellent composition, and nice lighting and colours. While the image is not a studio shot and is printable in acceptable quality to A4 (or letter size) it meets my minimum standards despite the rather strong noise. -- Smial 08:56, 4 August 2020 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 21:24, 7 August 2020 (UTC)