Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 17 2016

• 
  • Nomination Nationaal Park Weerribben-Wieden. Wandeling over het Laarzenpad door veenmoeras van De Wieden.
    --Agnes Monkelbaan 04:25, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 04:46, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ostring with nuns tower (left) and construction site (right) and Lüdinghausen Gate (background), Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:19, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion I think a light aura at the left top of the corrugated roof. However, good quality.--Agnes Monkelbaan 04:30, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
     Fixed Thanks, you're right. It's fixed (now). --XRay 04:48, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Fountain Woertherseemandl on Dr. Arthur Lemisch Platz, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 02:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 04:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Anchor sign at the former inn «Zum Goldenen Anker» on Herrengasse #2, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 02:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 04:05, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Relief of state coat of arms of Carinthia at the Bernhard von Spanheim fountain on Dr. Arthur Lemisch Platz, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 02:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:20, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Eastern gargoyle at the Bernhard von Spanheim fountain on Dr. Arthur Lemisch Platz, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 02:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Mummelgrummel 03:20, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bronze bust for Franz Josef Count of Enzenberg, created by Jakob Wald in 1894, on Ursulinengasse, Klagenfurt, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 02:22, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --XRay 04:20, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• * Nomination Centre Pierre Mendès-France (Université Panthéon-Assas), seen from the esplanade Les Olympiades, Paris, France. --Albert Bergonzo 19:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC) * Promotion  Support Good quality. MAy be a little bit too much contrast. --XRay 04:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Nomination Centre Pierre Mendès-France (Université Panthéon-Assas), seen from the esplanade Les Olympiades, Paris, France. --Albert Bergonzo 19:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. MAy be a little bit too much contrast. --XRay 04:26, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Summerlike Bassgeigensee ("Lake Contrabass") at Dobeinitz, municipality Keutschach am See --Hubertl 18:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality -- Spurzem 20:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Tegetthoff-Denkmal in Vienna --Hubertl 18:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Basotxerri 18:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
     Comment I agree and I understand that the upper part is part of the monument, but may I suggest a little crop (see note) that would make it more interesting, maybe even FP? That way it would really look as if the statue was aiming for the man sitting below and also the half "G" on the building would be gone. This could be a new version of the pic. W.carter 18:59, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dr. Karl Lueger-Monument, Vienna --Hubertl 18:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. W.carter 18:49, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Grillparzer monument, Volksgarten (Vienna) --Hubertl 18:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Interesting crop with him peeking out under the drapery. :) Good quality. W.carter 18:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination East facade of the Hotel de Ville de Paris, France (detail). --Albert Bergonzo 16:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 18:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Suspension bridge on hiking trail near Holzgau, Tyrol, Austria --Basotxerri 16:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Soloneying 18:32, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Suspension bridge on hiking trail near Holzgau, Tyrol, Austria --Basotxerri 16:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 17:59, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Drinking fountain in Arkaia, Vitoria-Gasteiz. Basque Country, Spain --Basotxerri 16:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 18:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Green sculpture in Vitoria-Gasteiz. Basque Country, Spain --Basotxerri 16:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Soloneying 22:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Refugees welcome (in Basque language), fixed to window in Vitoria-Gasteiz. Basque Country, Spain --Basotxerri 16:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 18:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hotel Boomgaard in Rekem (part) of Lanaken province of Limburg in Belgium.
    --Famberhorst 15:58, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Basotxerri 16:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Eendenkooi De Grote Otterskooi, in the province of Overijssel in the Netherlands. Ditch in the nature reserve.
    --Famberhorst 15:58, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 18:51, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Karl Ciesluk's Roach Stone , Lisburn, Co. Antrim, Ireland.Notafly 15:45, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 18:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Towers of the Schwerin Castle. Schwerin, Germany --Ввласенко 15:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 15:52, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Catholic subsidiary church Maria Rosary queen --Ermell 13:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:22, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Interior of catholic subsidiary church Maria Rosary queen --Ermell 13:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:22, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Rock near Wichsenstein --Ermell 13:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion OK for me. --Basotxerri 14:26, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ceiling in the catholic church Assumption in Rothmannsthal --Ermell 13:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 15:23, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Catholic church Assumption in Rothmannsthal --Ermell 13:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 13:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Schmidtburg castle – view from lower tower --Soloneying 11:51, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Too much of the clouds are blown out. W.carter 18:45, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
    Thanks, I updated the exposure in the left-top. Keep in mind a lot of close-to-white pixels reside there, but that was the nature of the scene. --Soloneying 19:45, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
    Ok, that takes the pic over the threshold for QI. Even if it was the nature of the scene that does not mean anything when judging the result. If the clouds are blown, they are blown and that's not QI. And could you please provide a geo tag so that we know where on the castle the picture was taken. W.carter 21:30, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Fenster im Turm Evangelische Kirche Hottenbach --Soloneying 11:51, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Too noisy and CAs all over the window. W.carter 18:40, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
    Removed noise and fringes! --Soloneying 20:09, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
    Ok, QI. But it could really do with some more categories, like what kind of window and maybe the paintings on the wall. W.carter 21:33, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Evangelische Kirche Hottenbach --Soloneying 11:51, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support An area of the masonry near the steps is rather overexposed. But, nevertheless, QI. Dmitry Ivanov 15:29, 14 August 2016 (UTC).
• 
  • Nomination Spain, Malaga, Alcazaba --Berthold Werner 11:36, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Soloneying 11:44, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dunarea Veche natural protected area, Macin, Romania --Poco a poco 07:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --XRay 09:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Building in Pepe Serón St 3, Ceuta, Spain --Poco a poco 07:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --XRay 09:50, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ships in the Danube Delta, Romania --Poco a poco 07:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Danube river by Rousse, Bulgaria --Poco a poco 07:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hooded crows (Corvus cornix) and great cormorant (Phalacrocorax carbo), Danube Delta, Romania --Poco a poco 07:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:43, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Church in Wigańcice 1 --Jacek Halicki 07:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:57, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Church in Wigańcice 2 --Jacek Halicki 07:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:57, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Cemetery in Wigańcice --Jacek Halicki 07:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 08:00, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Church in Niedźwiednik 1 --Jacek Halicki 07:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Poco a poco 07:57, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Church in Niedźwiednik 2 --Jacek Halicki 07:01, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 07:21, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Lysimachia clethroides, with its characteristic inflorescence. Family Primulaceae.
    --Famberhorst 05:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --XRay 06:13, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ostring and Nonnenturm (left) and construction site (right), Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 05:34, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:55, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Monument for sportspeople in Lech. Vorarlberg, Austria --Basotxerri 19:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Weak ok, the monument is sharp enough which is what matters, but the flowers right under it could have been a bit sharper. W.carter 19:11, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Red and green five-leaved ivy on granite. --W.carter 17:42, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --ElBute 12:44, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Five-leaved ivy on granite. --W.carter 17:42, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --ElBute 12:45, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Asplenium scolopendrium L. Hilden, Co. Antrim, Ireland.Notafly 14:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Withdrawn Withdrawn Just noted overexposed areas Notafly 15:07, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination A male Cardinal (Argynnis pandora). Adana, Turkey. --Zcebeci 08:57, 11 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline Weak  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. Too much empty space at the right and focus in front of the butterfly. --XRay 06:09, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Landscape at Vilanova de Santiso, Malpica de Bergantiños (Spain). --Elisardojm 22:46, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Review  Comment IMO the sky is overexposed. And it looks like not 100% JPEG, DoF to small. You should improve the categories and descriptions too, for example name of the stream and forest. --XRay 04:48, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: New version - Autorité des marchés financiers (French financial market regulator), place de la Bourse, Paris, France --Albert Bergonzo 20:45, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Review  Comment IMO too much sky and crop to close at the bottom. Categories should be improved. It looks like using categories as keywords. --XRay 04:51, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination an epitaph in the church in Gersfeld/Rhön --Verum 18:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline Weak  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. A difficult decision, but IMO too unsharp. Two things to improve the image: Sharper and ISO 100. Is it taken with a tripod (1/6 s exposure time)? And with automatic focus? There isn't enough contrast for good automatic focus. I've sometimes the same problem. --XRay 06:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination an epitaph in the church in Gersfeld/Rhön --Verum 18:54, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline Weak  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. A difficult decision, but IMO too unsharp. Two things to improve the image: Sharper and ISO 100. Is it taken with a tripod (1/6 s exposure time)? --XRay 06:04, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Winged-angel carved misericord (a ledge on the underside of the folding seat) in the choir stalls. From: Church of St Mary and St Nicholas, Beaumaris, North Wales. Grade: I; Date Listed: 23 September 1950; Cadw Building ID: 5620. --Llywelyn2000 06:24, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Church of St Mary and St Nicholas, Beaumaris, North Wales. Grade: I; Date Listed: 23 September 1950; Cadw Building ID: 5620. --Llywelyn2000 06:24, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Review Please remove CA, also needs perspective and wb correction.--ArildV 06:55, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: 14th-century carved effigy stone of St Iestyn; he wears a hooded cloak with a broach, holding a staff in his right hand and an inscribed scroll in his left. He is bearded and has the appearance of a hermit. St Iestyn's Church, Llaniestyn, Ynys Môn, Wales; a medieval church. A church is said to have been founded here by St Iestyn in the 7th century, with the earliest parts of the present building dating from the 12th century. --Llywelyn2000 06:24, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Review needed
• 
  • Nomination: Pink flower 2016 Nerium oleander --Livioandronico2013 15:07, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Review  Comment No species indetification, no QI. --C messier 11:33, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
    Now Identifieded. Jkadavoor 03:46, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The Lonche jaw from a karstic cave of southern Slovenia. Beeswax as dental filling. By User:Jaybear --Partynia 07:03, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. Not sharp enough, halos. --XRay 06:00, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bunker des Atlantikwalls an einer Küste in Dänemark By User:XXnickiXx --Nightflyer 21:10, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion Not a bad picture, but it is totally uncategorized. Fixable. W.carter 09:29, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
     Done Gruss --Nightflyer 20:56, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
    Thanks! Good quality. W.carter 07:10, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Consensual review

File:Karl Langer von Edenberg (1865-1935), Nr. 108, halfstatue (bronze) in the Arkadenhof of the University of Vienna-2916.jpg

• Nomination Karl Langer von Edenberg (1865-1935) --Hubertl 18:37, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose Too subtle IMHO, consider lifting shadows and/or increasing exposure. --Soloneying 23:05, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Comment I disagree. This is black bronce and this composition is intentional. --Hubertl 04:08, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support IMO OK. --XRay 06:00, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment I am sure the composition is as intended, I was referring to the tonality. On my calibrated Eizo, this looks nice, but on most displays (including my Macbook Pro retina), it does not work quite as well. Also, please use "bronse" in English description. --Soloneying 07:16, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support I think the tonality is sufficient (all of my screens Eizo, Acer, HP and Samsung got it), we should not downgrade the original images just to suit less technically advanced screens, you can use other versions for that. Also, if you are just commenting on something that you think is fixable, that is done in the nomination itself. No need to take it directly to "Discussion" for that. And it is spelled "bronze" in English. W.carter 08:12, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
• Weak  Support. A bit more DOF would have been nice. Yes, I know, this was intentional, but I would have chosen to stop down the aperture one or two stops, intentionally ;-) --Smial 11:24, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst 18:07, 15 August 2016 (UTC)
  • You need focus stacking, to get really more DOF in this case. F/16 ore smaller is not enough. But I must admit, that I was not prepared enough to made it. But thank you all for your comments and votings! --Hubertl 12:04, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 02:19, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Evangelische_Kirche_Hottenbach_Altar.jpg

• Nomination Altar Evangelische Kirche Hottenbach --Soloneying 11:51, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
• Withdrawn
•  Oppose I'm sorry, this is not a QI for me. Unfortunate use of DOF, strong noise, CAs and perspective issues. And please state full EXIF data if possible. As to the composition, I could understand the use of DOF if that crystal metal thingy in front was the main subject. However, it doesn't appear neither in the image title nor in the description, so I must suppose it isn't. And if it was, I think it had been better to show it entirely, not only a part. --Basotxerri 15:38, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Comment Thanks. Updated the image to address the technical issues. --Soloneying 18:24, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Oppose Sorry, the Main object is out of focus. --XRay 19:14, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Mostly per Basotxerri, if the altar is the main it is out of focus and if the artwork is the main it should not be cropped and it could also be sharper. An unfortunate composition, sorry. W.carter 09:29, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Running total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Hubertl 05:54, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Pillersdorfer_Kellergasse_-_Zellerndorf,_Lower_Austria-0320.jpg

• Nomination Winemaker alley with press houses and wine cellars, Pillersdorfer Straße In Zellerndorf, Lower Austria. By User:Kellergassen Niederösterreich 2016 --Hubertl 19:12, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support Good quality. --Basotxerri 19:32, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Oppose I think it would be better by cropping out the right side where another house begins. --MathieuMD 20:16, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Comment I'm sorry, but MathieuMD is right. --Basotxerri 20:48, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Good work, crop not necessary. Surroundings belong to objects. -- Smial 08:54, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support -- Spurzem 15:58, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 02:17, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:ЭВС1-07.jpg

• Nomination The high-speed train EVS1-07 «Sapsan» on Moscow — Saint Petersburg railway line. By User:Sergey Korovkin 84 --Brateevsky 15:42, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Support Good quality. --Soloneying 15:56, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Oppose Unsharp. Additionally, the location of the photo is missing --A.Savin 16:58, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Good composition, good colors and sufficient sharpness. Why should it not be QI? -- Spurzem 15:56, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support As per Spurzem --Albert Bergonzo 17:00, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Somewhat oversharpened and perhaps somewhat too strong denoising. Also small clipping highlights. But all in all good enough for QI. -- Smial 18:28, 14 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support--Ralf Roletschek 12:48, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 02:16, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Muscicapa_striata_gwybedog_mannog.jpg

• Nomination Red list status. I took this photograph in Pentrefoelas, North Wales. By User:Alun Williams333 --Llywelyn2000 10:24, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose Good composition but the tail and the beak not well focused. --Zcebeci 11:05, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Support Acceptable to me --Poco a poco 11:07, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Somewhat noisy and somewhat too low DOF, but good composition and lighting. Acceptable. -- Smial 21:59, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 02:15, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Collegiate_Church_of_St_Mary,_Warwick.jpg

• Nomination Collegiate Church of St Mary, Warwick --DeFacto 19:45, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose Ugly and unnatural perspective correction. Not QI IMO, but others may review--Lmbuga 03:14, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Comment Do not you can take the photo of front?--Lmbuga 03:21, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Info, @Lmbuga: I've uploaded a less unnatural perspective correction - please see what you think. The light was wrong the other sides when I was there! DeFacto (talk). 17:35, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Support New version is better. Nice picture IMO. Thanks DeFacto--Lmbuga 19:41, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support As for Lmbuga. -- Smial 18:29, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 02:15, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:The confluence of the rivers Vltava and Labe near Melnik castle, Czech Republic.JPG

• Nomination The confluence of the rivers Vltava and Labe near Melnik castle, Czech Republic --Ввласенко 15:09, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
• Decline
•  OpposeSorry, blurred image and not good detail IMO--Lmbuga 03:33, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
  
  •  Comment It's dark (taken at 13:09)--Lmbuga 03:38, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

@Lmbuga: Opposing means decline! If you are not sure, please give a comment. If you don´t accept a decision of someone else, then send it to discuss. --Hubertl 08:19, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Sorry, (poor English) I forget to write "decline"--Lmbuga 12:06, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

•  Oppose I can't see why this was taken at ISO 500. Noise reduction has unnecessarily suppressed details. --Basotxerri 15:35, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose I declined this picture above as well. Don't know why you nominated it again while the discussion was ongoing down here. W.carter 21:53, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 02:14, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Restaurant_und_Freibad_Schongauer_Lido.jpg

• Nomination: Restaurant und Freibad "Lido" am Nordufer der Lechstaustufe 6 --Karl432 18:39, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
• Review
•  Oppose Sorry but not sharp enough. --Ermell 21:16, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  
•  Support I disagree The Lens tends to make some bloom (or glow) at very high contrast edges, but at 100% view these are ineglible. We should not push QI requirements to utopian values. As can be seen at :File:Santuario de Las Lajas, Ipiales, Colombia, 2015-07-21, DD 03.JPG even much more expensive lenses are not completely free from such bloom. What next? --Smial 14:19, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Eemell. --A.Savin 07:00, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support For me it is sharp enough and QI -- Spurzem 15:20, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Ermell. --Basotxerri 21:12, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support I agree with Smial. --Verum 20:32, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 02:13, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Maulavern_Kellergasse,_Zellerndorf-6305.jpg

• Nomination: Winemaker alley with press houses and wine cellars, Maulavern In Zellerndorf, Lower Austria (Weinviertel). By Kellergassen Niederösterreich 2016 --Manfred Kuzel 13:47, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
• Review It's sharp, not noisy, but it's a pity that the building is in the shadow. A bit more space to the edges would have given a better composition, too. Weak  Support, IMO. --Basotxerri 15:37, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
   Oppose  Neutral Of course it is a pity. But with the shadow it is no QI for me. Please discuss. -- Spurzem 16:38, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment Are back lighted shots now in general not QI? Are there any important parts, which are invisible? Are the dark, shadow parts noisy? Are there CA problems? Are the bright areas overexposed in any way?--Hubertl 05:32, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Hubertl: Ich schrieb schon, dass es schade ist um das schöne Motiv mit dem sehr ansprechenden Hintergrund; aber der Hauptgegenstand liegt nun mal im Schatten, und das sieht nicht gut aus. Aber warum stimmst Du nicht mit „Pro“, wenn Du überzeugt bist, dass das kein Mangel ist? Gruß -- Spurzem 15:16, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

@Spurzem: Weil ich nicht für Bilder eine Bewertung abgeben darf, von denen ich zu einem Teil Urheber bin. Deshalb kann ich sie höchstens verteidigen. Schau dir den Projektaccount an. --Hubertl 17:06, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Vielleicht liege ich mit meiner Beurteilung ja wirklich falsch; deshalb jetzt „neutral“. Aber ehrlich gesagt: Mir gefällt der Schatten nicht. -- Spurzem 17:15, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

 Oppose Light, sorry--Lmbuga 04:53, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Hubertl 02:13, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Silver-washed_fritillary_(Argynnis_paphia)_female_Valesina.jpg

• Nomination Silver-washed fritillary (Argynnis paphia) female Valesina, Bentey Wood, Hampshire --Charlesjsharp 20:06, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
• Promotion
•  Oppose Not really sharp and under 1 MB. --Verum 21:16, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
  
  •  Comment Please @Verum: read the guidelines carefully. MB not the same as MP. This image has 2.6 MP. You can of course decline on sharpness grounds alone. Charlesjsharp 23:28, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support it has more than 2 MB. And it is sharp enough for QI --Hubertl 08:09, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Definitely not sharp enough for an image of such low resolution, IMO. I also think that with a camera able to take 20 mpxl images, we expect a bit more from QI images. --Peulle 11:04, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment As I am sure you know, it has nothing to do with the camera. This is a cropped image from a hand-held 400mm lens shot. Perhaps you are not familiar with photographing rare animals; you cannot always fill the frame. I could increase the resolution by leaving in lots of forest. It would satisfy your take on QI, but be useless in an online encyclopaedia. Charlesjsharp 11:45, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment In that case, I would suggest getting closer and using a macro lens instead. --Peulle 19:34, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
    •  Comment Wow! I never thought of that. Thanks. Charlesjsharp 21:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support because getting closer could be dangerous with wild animals--Moroder 05:11, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Yes, When I first saw it I thought it was the killer butterfly, but that's just an urban moth. Charlesjsharp 08:44, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support: sharp enough for a QI. — TintoMeches, 22:36, 9 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose As Peulle--Lmbuga 03:57, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Support Weak Pro, IMO. You were lucky it didn't bite you. --Basotxerri 15:28, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 06:14, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

File:Graffiti_clown_-_20150811_11h23_(11087).jpg

File:Graffiti clown - 20150811 11h23 (11087).jpg

• Nomination Graffiti of a clown in La Rochelle, France --Medium69 10:14, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Oppose Good quality. But I´m not sure, if FOP in France allows it. --Hubertl 11:40, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
  
  •  Comment Graffiti is often done without permission of the owner of the support, the author loses his rights. There are no worries about this case. --Medium69 21:44, 3 August 2016 (UTC)
    •  Comment The creator will NEVER lose his personal rights (Copyright) on his works. NEVER. Even when it´s "illegal" and not made on a permitted place! Actually, personal Copyrights never become illegal. They just exist. --Hubertl 05:36, 5 August 2016 (UTC)
  • Ist diese Schmiererei ein Kunstwerk? --Ralf Roletschek 11:30, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
    • Da ist Gestaltungswille eindeutig erkennbar. Über Geschmack läßt sich stets streiten. Ein Pfund Butter in einer Raumecke war auch mal ein Kunstwerk. -- Smial 12:13, 6 August 2016 (UTC)
      • geh´ bitte, Ralf, es ist sogar signiert! --Hubertl 08:13, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Hubertl, there is FOP in France, but only for noncommercial uses. The artist of this statue and his/her date of death should be stated, otherwise, this file will be deleted per COM:PRP. --Pokéfan95 08:15, 7 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Comment There have been uploaded a series of similar images. Does this mean that they all have to be declined? Some of them have already been promoted... --Basotxerri 17:01, 8 August 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment Actually: Yes. I sent this image to Deletion request to clear the status. And in fact, we have to accept national laws and restrictions. Even if we don´t like them. --Hubertl 06:11, 10 August 2016 (UTC)
    •  Comment This image should go to PR? Why have hunderts of graffitti images from France, we should clarify this issue and, in the case that we have to remove them, do that for all. Actually, when I saw the first images of Medium69 I double checked it and after seeing so many categories in France with graffitti I assumed (maybe wrongly) that they are tolerated Poco a poco 06:47, 12 August 2016 (UTC)
      • IMO, the main problem is, customary right will not (and never!) take place, even when we tolerate the wrong common practice here in this cases. It is the same with the pictures from the Disney resort. They are all (really all!) not allowed to publish it under a free licence. A lot of administrators have seen this, but nobody has responded. It needs just one mail from the Disney Corporation to delete all. Really all! And with maybe more problems for us. Because, if someone is using those images outside Wikimedia with the firm conviction, that everything which is written on Wikimedia Commons is correct, we can be sued. If you look at the comment of William above you can see, that he has no idea about legal matters. And of course, he will take it personal. But do we really want to bury our head in the sand??--Hubertl 07:16, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
        • I startet this: Commons:Village_pump/Copyright#Hundreds of graffiti pictures of France where there is no FOP, feel free to drop there your comments Poco a poco 09:25, 13 August 2016 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per others. No FoP in France. --XRay 05:57, 14 August 2016 (UTC)

Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 06:14, 16 August 2016 (UTC)