Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives January 29 2015

• 
  • Nomination Agapanthus Closeup --Ram-Man 03:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:47, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Agave americana 'Medio-Picta' --Ram-Man 03:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:46, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Agave attenuata --Ram-Man 03:25, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:45, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Chanticleer Gardens Main House --Ram-Man 23:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Enchanting, lovely and romantic, a dream of springtime in nature. --Johann Jaritz 03:38, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Chanticleer Gardens Plants --Ram-Man 23:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:43, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Figures at Neue Burg, Hofburg, Vienna --Hubertl 23:22, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. --Johann Jaritz 03:33, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Monument to Smilodon, saber toothed cat, Nature Sciences Museum, Mar del Plata, Argentina --Ezarate 22:22, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline Unsharp and too low resolution --Jacek Halicki 23:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Concattedrale di San Giovenale --Livioandronico2013 21:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 21:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination protected landscape and natural reserve in/near Aschaffenburg --KaiBorgeest 21:27, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 23:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The basilica of St. Johannes in Johannisberg as seen from south-east --DXR 20:45, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 21:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The building located at Hauptstraße 40, Erbach. The church is visble in the background. A typical German bus stop is located in front of the building --DXR 20:45, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 21:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The choir of the Church St. Peter und Paul in Eltville am Rhein --DXR 20:45, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 21:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination St Paul's Cathedral Dome from One New Change --Colin 20:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Huge, but of course great quality. Imho a bit too much blue at the top but still very good. --DXR 20:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Flower buds of Heuchera marmalade.
    Famberhorst 18:49, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Bgag 20:27, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Castle of Santa Barbara, Alicante, Spain --Poco a poco 18:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 23:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Cathedral of Porto, Portugal --Poco a poco 18:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Pity that lady, but good quality.--Famberhorst 18:56, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Silfra canyon, Þingvellir National Park, Suðurland, Iceland --Poco a poco 18:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Bgag 20:27, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Merri Church, Paris, France (by Diliff) --Paris 16 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 16:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Merri Church, Paris, France (by Diliff) --Paris 16 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:46, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Merri Church, Paris, France (by Diliff) --Paris 16 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 16:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Merri Church, Paris, France (by Diliff) --Paris 16 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 16:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Saint Merri Church, Paris, France (by Diliff) --Paris 16 16:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:46, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination german journalist en:Ulrich Wickert --Ralf Roletschek 15:53, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 21:08, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Fairy chimneys in Zelve, Cappadocia, Turkey --Bgag 14:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 18:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Fairy chimneya in Zelve, Cappadocia, Turkey --Bgag 14:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 16:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Fairy chimney in Zelve, Cappadocia, Turkey --Bgag 14:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:46, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Helsinki; detail of ferry "baltic princess" --Ralf Roletschek 14:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 21:08, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hong Kong; View from Victoria Peak to Victoria Harbour and Kowloon --Ralf Roletschek 14:00, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Livioandronico2013 17:42, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Ornaro Alta --Livioandronico2013 13:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 16:46, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dahlia 'Ed Black' flowerbud. --Joydeep 13:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Bgag 15:04, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dahlia 'American Beauty'. --Joydeep 13:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 16:54, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Germany, Trier, Weberbach 57 --Berthold Werner 11:34, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 13:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Pedestrian zone over Nysa Kłodzka in Kłodzko --Jacek Halicki 09:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Joydeep 13:37, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Brigde at Malczewskiego Street in Kłodzko --Jacek Halicki 09:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 13:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 30 Czeska Street in Kłodzko 1 --Jacek Halicki 09:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 13:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination 30 Czeska Street in Kłodzko 3 --Jacek Halicki 09:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cayambe 09:53, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Concattedrale di San Giovenale (Narni) --Livioandronico2013 09:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cayambe 09:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination French Guiana, Île Royale: houses of prison guardians. --Cayambe 08:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support QI for me. --Halavar 09:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Euston station. Mattbuck 06:48, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Jacek Halicki 09:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The London Eye. Mattbuck 06:48, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Joydeep 07:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, Malaysia: Marina Court Resort Condominium. --Cccefalon 05:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion CAs (see notes) and the left is leaning in a very little bit --Christian Ferrer 06:29, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
     Done I removed the CA and updated slightly the perspective. A 100% solution is not possible, as there are obviously some competing "verticals" at the left side. --Cccefalon 16:28, 26 January 2015 (UTC) Support --Christian Ferrer 18:58, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Kota Kinabalu (Sabah): Gurudwara Sahib (Sikh Temple), built in 1924 --Cccefalon 05:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 06:01, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Campus Kuala Lumpur --Cccefalon 05:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 13:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Berjaya Times Square --Cccefalon 05:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Joydeep 07:13, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia: Al-Bukhary Mosque. In the background Berjaya Times Square --Cccefalon 05:57, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality --Halavar 09:13, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Château d'eau du Peyrou. Montpellier, Hérault, France. --Christian Ferrer 05:52, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:59, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Palmerworm oak (Gastro Pacha quercifolia). Location, The Famberhorst.
    Famberhorst 05:49, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 06:02, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Location Natuurterrein The Famberhorst. Deterioration young dead beech tree (Fagus sylvatica).
    Famberhorst 05:49, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support --Christian Ferrer 06:27, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Holy Cross church, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality.--Famberhorst 05:56, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination LVM insurance in Münster, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 05:36, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Tomb Kirschner at the cemetery at the Mühlenweg, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:33, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline  Oppose overexposed background --Christian Ferrer 06:30, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Skybox and staircase of the look-out tower on Pyramidenkogel, Keutschach, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 04:20, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion The right side is leaning in yet. --Cccefalon 06:07, 26 January 2015 (UTC)  Done Corrected version uploaded. --Johann Jaritz 07:28, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
    Good quality. --Cccefalon 08:24, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Construction details of the look-out tower on Pyramidenkogel, Keutschach, Carinthia, Austria --Johann Jaritz 04:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Joydeep 07:15, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Apery. Research Institute of Experimental Pathology and Therapy, Academy of Sciences of Abkhazia. Sukhumi, Abkhazia. --Halavar 01:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Joydeep 07:14, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Russian-Abkhazian Dictionaries. Sukhumi, Abkhazia. --Halavar 01:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 13:18, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Track-side emergency brake and emergency telephone --Linie29 17:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 23:47, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Location Natuurterrein The Famberhorst. Frosted yellow vibration fungus (Tremella mesenteric) on dead oak branch.
    Famberhorst 16:42, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cayambe 08:08, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hosta 'Royal Standard' --Ram-Man 13:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cayambe 08:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hakonechloa macra 'All Gold' --Ram-Man 13:49, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion QI for me. --Bff 13:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hue, Vietnam: Details of a wall decoration at the outside wall of a house in the Imperial palace complex in Hue --Cccefalon 08:22, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Hubertl 23:44, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Otto-Mann-Haus, Juist, Lower Saxony, Germany --XRay 06:53, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Not perfect, but good enough for QI --Hubertl 23:46, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Isuzu trucks in Hongkong --Ralf Roletschek 21:25, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Tilted clockwise (reference: pole at the bus station) --Cccefalon 08:35, 25 January 2015 (UTC) Done --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
     Support --Cccefalon 15:49, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Altar of Divino Rostro Chapel, Mar del Plata, Argentina --Ezarate 19:47, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Dendrocopos syriacus, Ashkelon National Park, Israel..
    מינוזיג 16:30, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Oak (Quercus). Fresh wound of dead broken oak branch.
    Famberhorst 16:30, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination The remains of the Bagrat castle. Sukhumi, Abkhazia. --Halavar 01:36, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 12:35, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Railway tracks between the stations Wiesbaden-Biebrich and Wiesbaden-Ost. --Code 21:06, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality --DKrieger 22:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination A view of Erbach, its market place and the town hall --DXR 17:09, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 06:12, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Nettle, Urtica, Location, Famberhorst.
    Famberhorst 16:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support --Cccefalon 06:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Hemerocallis 'Catherine Woodbury'. Location, Tuinen Mien Ruys.
    Famberhorst 16:16, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Cccefalon 06:09, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination View from Cime de la Bonnette northwards into the direction of the Ubaye valley --Imehling 18:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Pleclown 11:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination View from Cime de la Bonnette southwards into the Tinée valley --Imehling 18:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Pleclown 11:55, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Villa Montana,Rudolstadt --NoRud 18:01, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Pleclown 11:56, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Potanthus sp. (Dart) Jkadavoor 16:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Comment Unsharp, IMO not fixable. --Dnalor 01 18:14, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
    unsharp. --Ram-Man 02:46, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Bus standard de Rennes --Billy69150 10:19, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
    Way too much sky. Mattbuck 00:13, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline The composition is unbalanced and the exposure is not great. The sky is somewhat overexposed and the shadows lack detail. --Ram-Man 02:45, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination King's Norton railway station. Mattbuck 07:51, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Ralf Roletschek 18:39, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination eine Biene auf einer Zinnie --Slick 19:15, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Comment Please add and English description. --Halavar 09:47, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
     Done, –Be..anyone 15:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
    Needs a crop at left and right to remove annoying bright bits at the bottom. Mattbuck 00:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
    Good quality. --Ram-Man 02:33, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination View of Archanes, Crete. --C messier 18:21, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
    Bit of M/G CA at bottom right, some tilt. Mattbuck 00:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC) Done --C messier 21:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion Good quality. --Mattbuck 23:11, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination A hearth-shaped leaf (Smilax aspera) --Zeynel Cebeci 16:43, 18 January 2015 (UTC) *  Comment Sorry, your actual review rate is 16:0 --Hubertl 18:40, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline Resolution is too low. 2MP is the minimum and we demand higher resolution for easy to take images. Downsampled images violate the guidelines. Please upload a higher resolution version and try again. --Ram-Man 02:36, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination Erigeron aureus (Golden Fleabane) --Wsiegmund 13:49, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
    Rather harsh light. Mattbuck 00:03, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Decline Inflorescence (the main part of the plant) is not in focus. --Bff 13:19, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination War Graves Cemetery in Hausdülmen, Dülmen, North Rhine-Westphalia, Germany --XRay 04:26, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
    I'm not sure the DOF is good enough. Mattbuck 22:25, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Promotion DoF is fine. Good quality. --Ram-Man 02:31, 27 January 2015 (UTC)
• 
  • Nomination: Fields Medal --Medium69 10:24, 9 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Review  Comment there is some unnecessary empty space below the medal. --El Grafo 19:33, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
     Done ; Space is deleted.--Medium69 00:53, 15 January 2015 (UTC)Derivative work of a copyrighted work ? A question...--Jebulon 21:37, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
    Not at all. I added the source that I had forgotten.--Medium69 00:02, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Consensual review

File:Außenansicht der Abtei Seckau 2.JPG

• Nomination Exterior view of Seckau Abbey, Seckau, Styria, Austria. --Dnalor 01 15:29, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
• Promotion  Oppose Sorry, but the left side of the image (with grass and trees) are blurred and that can't be fixed. --Halavar 16:34, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
   Comment I cannot detect unsharpness, at 24mm the aperture of the lens was 3,5 at this pic while maximum relative aperture of that lens is 1,4 - so why the rest of the pic is sharp? --Dnalor 01 16:41, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support The grass and the trees is not the mainsubject of the photo. This part could be cut off, if you want. It is the Abbey and this is shown excellent. --Steindy 17:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support I tried a crop, but its not getting better. Ok for me as it is.--Hubertl 22:40, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Per Steindy --Johann Jaritz 03:35, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose - significant JPEG artifaction per Halavar. Mattbuck 23:11, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose I would not have opposed if the left part of the building was not also affected by the issues mentioned by Halavar, certainly the result of a too small DOF --Christian Ferrer 09:04, 24 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Comment I made a reset to the second uploaded, only shift corrected version, please review again. --Dnalor 01 09:07, 25 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support a real improvment IMO, I support this --Christian Ferrer 12:18, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 15:36, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Fiat Ducato Michelet TUDIP.jpg

• Nomination Navette au Puy-en-Velay --Billy69150 14:48, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
• Decline Too low resolution. --Bgag 15:22, 20 January 2015 (UTC)  Comment  Done --Billy69150 21:55, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
   Support Good quality. --Dnalor 01 08:58, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose overexposed and a lot of artefacts --Christian Ferrer 20:17, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Christian. Mattbuck 23:10, 23 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --C messier 15:33, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Horse_head_in_Baths_of_Diocletian_(Rome).JPG

• Nomination Horse head in Baths of Diocletian (Rome) --Livioandronico2013 20:04, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
• Promotion The picture don´t meet the guidline principles: a) The filenam does not describe the subject exactly, b) the description is wrong, it is not just a horse head, this is undoubtedly the head of a unicorn c) insufficient categorization therefore. --Hubertl 01:56, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  IMHO, this at the top of the head looks more like hair than a horn. --C messier 11:04, 19 January 2015 (UTC) These figures, in the patio, are part of a collection from different sources and periods, but mostly mythical figures. See other pictures you can find in the web. --Hubertl 12:17, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  Thanks C messier, but never mind, it's just a decoration on a horse but I do not want to waste time with those who do not understand --Livioandronico2013 13:36, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  All this in wikipedia would be considered original research, we should try to find a reliable source of what it's. Here it mentions that it is a "Horse Head, originally from inside the Temple of Divine Trajan" (but been a tourist guide isn't and the most reliable). --C messier 14:55, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
  C messier you can see better Thanks[Here] --Livioandronico2013 20:57, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
• C messier Have a look at any cattle heads, you see, that at the top of the head you almost always will find a group of curly hairs. Pretty typical, especially from bull heads. This is in fact the inspiration for this artistic expression you find at this horse-head. When you take a look at the other figures, you will see, that mostly they all are mythical figures, except a elefant and a ram. But these figures are not from the cloister like today, they have different origins. Can we read anything of this in the descriptions? No! The figure beneath does have a horse head, but extraordinary small with a goat beard. Ever seen a horse with an goat beard and ridge of hairs on the front from the lower jam down to the breast? It could be a camel head, but I don´t believe it, but this is not the question here. Camels don´t have beards. But check a goat! And we all know (I hope so), goats are always mythical figures, until today! Another figure shows a horse head (from the side) with an rhino horn and a rhino muzzle, but the silhouette of a horse. None of them have man made decorations like panaches as you can find on quadrille figures, in this case you even can´t see a head-collar to keep a panache fixed (which you see in fact at all horse statues with panaches). On the other hand, what kind of decoration should that be, unfixed? Just a word to the term "decoration": The first thing you learn as an historian is, that there is no decoration without further meaning. A decoration never stands for itself. Livioandronice was running through this museum without any system, he just wanted to make pictures, but did´nt realize until now, that Commons isn´t panoramio or flickr, were nobody will ask you for details. Commons stands in close relation to Wikipedia and is part of an encyclopedian projekt and not a children's birthday party. After his visit to the museum, he is just as clueless, related to the exhibits of this museum, as before. He didn´t even made pictures of signs, which is essential, he did´t try to get a catalog, if this catalog is too expensive, he is able to picture some pages. He hasn´t shoot the sign of the brutus figure (after then he then wrote, that this is a bust of a brute (sic!), I had to tell him, that he has pictured Lucius Junius Brutus. I made then the categorization, renamed the file, drafted the correct description then, after he refused to do this, probably because of aggrieved vanity. This is not the way we have to work in Wikimedia projects. And I spent my private time within this spirit since more than 10 years! If Livioandronico wants to get pictures properly assessed, he has to do more than just to do some simple photo shoots alike typical japanese tourists.
  This QI-project here is not a contest, who will have more Quality Images at the very end (though some of the guys here act like this). Nobody ever will give you a shit for this! Primarely, Commons is just a supporter for Wikipedia. But pictures without proper description and correct categorization or wrong file names are simply useless. Nothing else! --Hubertl (talk) 11:47, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  

I know that descriptions must be accurate and with correct spelling, but in case of disputed accuracy, both sides must present resiable sources to support their opinion. The sources I have found support in this one Livioandronico's opinion. PS. I thought goats were real animals. --C messier 13:43, 20 January 2015 (UTC)

• The source, you presented, is a blogger, not an historian at all, blogging about his and his friends travel to Rome. This is not a content source at all. And I if you wanna kidden me (goats), send me a mail! :-( We can change the complete system of QI, of course, so everyone will nominate by himself, no matter whether it satisfies any guidelines or not. Is this what you want? C messier??
  I asked an historian yesterday evening (not a roman history specialist), I hope she will help me to get in contact to a specialist of roman art history soon. Whoever habe visited italian museums (exept the new parts of the Vatican museums and some others, also some new part of the Museum of the Diocletian therme) knows, that very often there is a lack of descriptions, and if there are some, they are sometimes difficult to understand and pretty often wrong or not accurate. Or there are descriptions, but you can´t find it. Those are often enough souverirs for Tourists. As overall in the world, cultural institutions ran out of money. --Hubertl 14:19, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
• user:Hubertl, I don't want to kid you, nor to offend. I said it isn't and the most reliable (if you click the file there is a caution), but I found nothing saying its a unicorn, so I will wait for more reliable sources. --C messier 14:27, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
• I think this is more reliable [1] (it's in italian), The text begins with the description of the statues in the cloister of Michelangelo, saying they depict "un dromedario, un cavallo, una coppia di tori, un rinoceronte un elefante e un ariete". --C messier 14:58, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  • More over the book Giuseppe Lugli (1975) Itinerario di Roma antica in page 364 mentions (as I can see in google books quotes) "Dal Foro di Traiano provengono rilievi ornamentali che si trovano in varie collezioni, le protomi colossali di cavalli, rinoceronti, elefanti ed altri animali che adornano il chiostro di Michelangelo nelle Terme di Diocleziano e il noto rilievo con". --C messier 15:03, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Thank you, a great moment to get in contact with Luigi Sperti! You mentioned a book of Giuseppe Lugli from 1975 (he died 1967!), which I didn´t find. Can you give me a link? Today I have spoken with an very reputable, wellknown historian (Since 2012 I am Wikipedian in residence at the National heritage office in Vienna), he asked me to send him all the informations I (we) have until now. Not just for this case, even for clearing the other questions too. All in all its going to become a quite interesting dispute. I will try to get in contact with Rosanna Friggeri, director of the National Roman Museum - Baths of Diocletian, too. --Hubertl 00:16, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Yes Hubertl today I talk with the minister of cultural heritage, but please this story is getting ridiculous! The sources must be shown and not requested. To err is human but to persevere is diabolical.--Livioandronico2013 09:09, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

[Itinerario di Roma antica in google books], [the national library of Australia] and [worldcat]. Apparently, it was published post-morten. --C messier 12:01, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

•  Support This whole discussion is confusing and I don't understand what the argument is even about. As for the image itself, it meets quality standards. If someone cares to explain in a sentence or two why I shouldn't support, I'll consider changing my vote. Ram-Man 18:30, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support No sources for unicorn, only for a horse. Good technical quality. --C messier 11:43, 26 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not really sharp and some parts overexposed. --Steindy 22:48, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Livioandronico2013 22:26, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Dome_of_Saint_Peter's_Basilica_(exterior)_at_night1.jpg

• Nomination Dome of Saint Peter's Basilica (exterior) at night --Livioandronico2013 21:15, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
• Decline
•  Support I like this view the best of the three. --Ram-Man 17:19, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Major part of this picture is just black, I ask for a discussion, please.--Jebulon 21:41, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose simply too black. --Alchemist-hp 06:19, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
• Needs sharpening. Mattbuck 22:58, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too much black as the other two photos. --Steindy 22:51, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --C messier 15:21, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

File:P%C3%A9rou_les_uros_du_lac_Titicaca_(4).jpg

• Nomination Sur le Lac Titicaca les Uros (Aymara) du Pérou.--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 09:23, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
• Decline
•  SupportQI -- Spurzem 09:28, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nothing sharp, general low JPEG quality. --Mattbuck 22:07, 19 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Donesharpening in the image. Please care to take another look?--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 11:41, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Quality isn't ok: unsharp, noisy, unbalanced bad crop. --Alchemist-hp 06:23, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose Though sharpening sharpness is not okay, not a QI for me. --Dnalor 01 09:08, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
  @Dnalor 01, Mattbuck, and Alchemist-hp:  Done cropping and sharpening in the image. Please care to take another look?--PIERRE ANDRE LECLERCQ 15:01, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

 Oppose Too many jpeg artifacts after sharpening. I'm afraid it cannot be fixed. --C messier 11:38, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

 Comment I made a reset to the first uploaded version (cropping and sharpening), please review again. -- Pierre André (talk) 17:10, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --C messier 15:27, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

File:Luton Airport Parkway railway station MMB 12 222006.jpg

• Nomination 222006 at Luton Airport Parkway. Mattbuck 07:59, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
• Decline One third of the picture is extremely unsharp. --Palauenc05 22:04, 15 January 2015 (UTC)
  Unless you're referring to the right hand side, in which case it's called composition, I have no idea what you're referring to. --Mattbuck 08:02, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
   Oppose Composition or not, the train on the right is unsharp, as well as the front bumper of the left train. Sorry, but IMO there is not enough quality in this image. --Palauenc05 23:00, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support because of the unsharpness partially, not all of a photo must be sharp. --Ralf Roletschek 12:14, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose This blurry photos from the train window may be artistically; valuable QI they are certainly not IMHO. --Steindy 02:16, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Oppose per other opposes. --Alchemist-hp 06:25, 22 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --C messier 15:24, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

File:AndrewMercerIMG_3053_Eastern_Bearded_Dragon.jpg

• Nomination Head-on detail of an Eastern Bearded Dragon (Pogona barbata) basking in Brisbane's Victoria Park. Brisbane, Australia --Bald white guy 03:03, 10 January 2015 (UTC)
• Promotion QI for me--Holleday 19:00, 14 January 2015 (UTC)
   Oppose This image was clearly downsampled. See the rules. Ram-Man 18:55, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Downsampling can't be the sole reason for opposing. Good quality. Yann 14:34, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Why not? It's one of the rules, along side any of the various other quality reasons. Downsampling to this extreme is destructive to quality. Ram-Man 03:27, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support GQ --Palauenc05 00:09, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support The rules require 2 MP and the picture therefore complies with the rules. Good quality. --Steindy 01:14, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support, like it. It's a surprisingly small JPEG for such a good photo. No idea how that could be caused, the only JPG rule I know is "don't, it gets worse". –Be..anyone 17:10, 21 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 15:23, 28 January 2015 (UTC)

File:AndrewMercerIMG 5585 Australian Water Dragon.jpg

• Nomination Eastern Water Dragon enjoying a warm pond in the late afternoon --Bald_white_guy 10:42, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
• Promotion GQ. --Palauenc05 11:58, 8 January 2015 (UTC)
   Oppose I disagree. This image was clearly downsampled and is thus disqualified from QI as per the rules. Ram-Man 18:46, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Downsampling can't be the sole reason for opposing. Good quality. Yann 14:33, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support Sharp details anyway. GQ --Palauenc05 15:50, 17 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support The rules require 2 MP and the picture therefore complies with the rules. Good quality. --Steindy 01:13, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • The resolution and downsampling rules are two different rules. Compliance with one does not mean you comply with the other. Ram-Man 03:31, 18 January 2015 (UTC)
  • Prove the downsampling, please.--Jebulon 21:02, 20 January 2015 (UTC)
    • Really? I should waste time proving the obvious? Ram-Man 13:37, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
      • Tell me how I could waste my time, I'm here to learn (well, actually for some fun first.) –Be..anyone 17:18, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
        • Alright, I'll bite, but I'm only spending a few minutes on this:
          1. Photographer shoots with Canon EOS 7D 18MP (See this). Photographer admitted he uses this camera and downsamples to hide quality defects (like noise).
          2. The smallest downsampled image it outputs is 2592x1728, but these are 1800x1200.
          3. The ratios are identical (3:2). A number of other cameras output at 4:3.
          4. It's nearly impossible to output 1800x1200 natively with this level of sharpness, so this must be either a crop or a downsample. One of my sharpest out of camera images was shot with a tripod, but there is no way all his images use a tripod.
          5. Mathematically, downsampling increases the Signal-to-Noise Ratio and decreases the Signal in the absolute. This is why it looks super sharp and beautiful on a monitor, but when printed at 300dpi on a A3 size print the details start to look undersampled.
          6. This kind of shallow depth of field cannot be achieved small sensor camera and there are no SLR that can take pictures like this without downsampling.
        • Ram-Man 13:07, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
      • Thanks, so "surprisingly small" (< 1MB) wasn't too far off. Admittedly I only look at 200% zoom when I try something. I wouldn't know who uses which camera with what features, and there's no "photos by" category in this case. –Be..anyone 19:51, 22 January 2015 (UTC)
        • After reviewing hundreds or thousands of photos, you can often tell which camera or brand was used to take a picture just by looking at it. When I nominated this picture taken with an Olympus E-M5 for a FP, I was looking through Category:Corallus caninus when I saw this picture. I thought to myself "It looks like it was taken with an Olympus camera too. And lo and behold I looked at the EXIF and it was taken with an Olympus E-500. Both cameras were released 7 years apart. Was it a lucky guess? I don't know. Back in the mid 2000's, I could visually tell Panasonic, Fuji, Canon, and Nikon point-and-shoot cameras from each other by their characteristic grain/noise patterns. -- Ram-Man 03:05, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
        • Just to prove it was no fluke, I went through another dozen images in that category to see if I could find any others taken with an Olympus. I only spotted one that I thought was from an Olympus camera: this one. This time an Olympus PEN E-PL1. Ram-Man 03:10, 23 January 2015 (UTC)
•  Support a well composed picture.-- Pierre André (talk) 14:57, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --C messier 15:22, 28 January 2015 (UTC)