Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 30 2016

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Houses - Puerto de Mogán - 02.jpg

[edit]

File:São_Paulo_downtown_Sé,_São_Paulo_city,_Brazil_02.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination São Paulo downtown --The Photographer 03:42, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --XRay 07:13, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now, poor categories... --A.Savin 14:39, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 13:38, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

File:2016_Niemcza,_pl._Rynek_33_03.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination 33 Market Square in Niemcza --Jacek Halicki 00:00, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 06:24, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Weak  Oppose Insufficient quality. Sorry. The cars at the bottom are really disturbing. --XRay 06:24, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, but the car is really disturbing the composition --Michielverbeek 07:46, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The left car is part of the urban landscape and while it is slightly disturbing, its presence can be forgiven if the rest of the image were very good, but the car roof at the bottom ruins it. That would need to be cropped out, but then that would crop the left car in half, so that won't work. Sadly, the best alternative is to re-shoot. On a comforting note, the building does look quite good so I recommend reshooting.--Peulle 11:07, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 13:34, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Кадин_мост.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Kadin most over Struma river. By User:Sarbinska --Лорд Бъмбъри 20:28, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:12, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Hopelessly overprocessed. --A.Savin 11:02, 26 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Sky is terribly noisy and pixellated. -- Ikan Kekek 10:32, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per A.Savin and Ikan Kekek. The composition is nice, but the processing rules it out of QI.--Peulle 10:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 13:35, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

File:Alcedo_atthis_-_Common_Kingfisher,_Mersin_2016-12-11_01-5.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Common Kingfisher (Alcedo atthis) watching for fishes. Mersin, Turkey. --Zcebeci 07:30, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Bird is a little small, but good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 10:16, 22 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, but most of the picture is just water. Should be cropped from three sides, but then the photo would go below 2mpix. --A.Savin 14:15, 23 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Weak support Not ideal but OK for me. At least you can see the environment where the bird comes down for hunting. --Basotxerri 08:50, 24 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Even the bird is small, the photo has a good quality plus good sharpening. --Goroth 14:51, 25 December 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support I see A.Savin's criticism, but it's good to have some images in QI that show some surroundings in addition to the bird, which is sharp enough. Not an FP candidate, but good enough for QI, I think. Weak support vote.--Peulle 10:48, 27 December 2016 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 13:36, 29 December 2016 (UTC)