Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 10 2020

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Abeja (Apis mellifera), Hartelholz, Múnich, Alemania, 2020-06-27, DD 104-111 FS.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Mouth of a bee (Colletes daviesanus), Hartelholz, Munich, Germany --Poco a poco 08:33, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Blood Red Sandman 17:28, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • specimen? --Charlesjsharp 18:57, 2 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Not relevant for QI --Poco a poco 09:37, 3 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose insufficient sharpness --EV Raudtee 14:48, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Sharpness is quite sufficient, considering the size of a bee's mouth! Looks great at full screen on my 19-inch monitor. But as I said before, providing information is always relevant. -- Ikan Kekek 23:35, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support per Ikan. --Mdaniels5757 19:24, 6 July 2020 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Mdaniels5757 19:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Krakow_2018_24.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Sculptures on Tower of Kraków City Hall (Magistrate's Building) in Poselska street, Kraków --Scotch Mist 10:40, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Oppose Needs perspective correction. --Buidhe 11:52, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment @Buidhe: IMHO 'perspective correction' would be too severe here and would make the Tower look "weird" so have put this up for discussion and the opinions of others (it may on occasion be helpful to comment before declining a nomination) --Scotch Mist 13:27, 1 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, not a fan of the angle here. --Mdaniels5757 17:31, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Mdaniels5757 19:23, 9 July 2020 (UTC)

File:Light_Pink_Garden_Rose_by_A_-_2020-06-18.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Light pink garden rose --A 23:48, 22 June 2020 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Too blury for me. --Hwwo 16:57, 24 June 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support I disagree. The background isn't in focus, but it doesn't need to be -- the subject is. --Mdaniels5757 02:09, 27 June 2020 (UTC)
  •  Comment I would support it if the flower was identified. --Palauenc05 15:05, 28 June 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support It's a standard practice to have the b/g defocussed. The bloom is fine, which is what counts. Rodhullandemu 13:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose For now, proper description is missing. --Palauenc05 06:18, 30 June 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me --EV Raudtee 14:36, 4 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now per Palauenc05. The Vietnamese text Google translates to "A pale rose bud", and no specific category of roses is given. Please correct me if I'm operating on a misimpression, but I believe that the variety of rose is expected in the description and category for QI. -- Ikan Kekek 01:32, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now per Ikan Kekek --Sandro Halank 19:15, 5 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support Identifying the species would be desirable, but "rose" is specific enough to warrant QI IMO. --MB-one 17:22, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
  •  Support per MB-one Blood Red Sandman 17:31, 7 July 2020 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Promoted   --Mdaniels5757 19:22, 9 July 2020 (UTC)