Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives June 19 2019

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:OutDoor_2018,_Friedrichshafen_(1X7A0311).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Mannequin at OutDoor 2018 --MB-one 10:53, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Uploaded new version. --MB-one 17:32, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Insufficient quality. --大诺史 12:15, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Left crop, part of shoe is cut off.--Peulle 09:15, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 01:18, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Nappersdorf_Kellergasse_31.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Objekt in der Kellergasse in Nappersdorf (Niederösterreich). --Manfred Kuzel 03:33, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 03:55, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
     Oppose Distorted. --Tsungam 07:34, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
     Comment: Das ist nicht verzerrt, sondern leicht seitlich aufgenommen, weil eine Aufnahme der Front platzbedingt nicht möglich war. --Manfred Kuzel 05:53, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support --Moroder 09:28, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 01:18, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Schwalbenschwanz_-_Schmetterling_IMG_2261.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Schwalbenschwanz-Papilio machaon.--Fischer.H 09:36, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Aristeas 09:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
     Oppose Not sharp enough and grainy --Uoaei1 13:21, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support The main object is sharp. -- Spurzem 15:56, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Spurzem --Cvmontuy 04:48, 15 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support This is a butterfly and not an etching. It's "unsharp" by nature. --Stepro 03:22, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose This is blurred Stepro, it is not unsharp by nature. Charlesjsharp 20:53, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The wings might be sufficiently sharp, but the rest of the butterfly is not. And the background is noisy. Also this is just a bit over 4 MP with a camera, that should be able to produce 21 MP images. If this is a heavily cropped image, this might explain some of the mentioned problems. Sorry! --Robert Flogaus-Faust 17:46, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Promoted   --Seven Pandas 01:17, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:BMW_440i_Coupe_M_Sport_GIIAS_2017.JPG

[edit]

  • Nomination BMW 440i Coupe M Sport at Gaikindo Indonesian International Auto Show 2017 --Vulphere 07:01, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --MB-one 09:02, 11 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Background looks overprocessed --Cvmontuy 09:48, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Cvmontuy, though the car looks rather good. -- Ikan Kekek 07:56, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support I have no problem with the background. Sometims I don't understand the arguments for decline. -- Spurzem 15:59, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose All humans somehow look artificial. --Stepro 03:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Perspective, lighting, noise resp. noise reduction. --Smial 10:10, 17 June 2019 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 01:16, 19 June 2019 (UTC)

File:Tour_of_Norway_2019_Drammen_(5).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Officials' car during Tour of Norway 2019.--Peulle 07:03, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --SH6188 12:17, 7 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Composition: 80% road, 20% just a car. What's the point of that? --Palauenc05 22:58, 9 June 2019 (UTC)
  • The reason is just that I wanted to show the car on the road the cyclists are riding on, rather than just a zoomed in shot of the car.--Peulle (talk) 20:08, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The picture does not show what it is supposed to say. Besides, the roof of the car is too bright. -- Spurzem 14:47, 10 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support - Both the picture and filename are acceptable to me. -- Ikan Kekek 00:47, 12 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Support It's not an excellent composition and technically it is far from perfect. However the small flags on the car show to me something special. --Michielverbeek 06:44, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
@Michielverbeek: The small flags might make the picture very valuable, though you can hardly recognize it. Bit is that why it is also a quality image? Sometimes I can only wonder about the evaluation criteria. -- Spurzem 09:20, 13 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose agree other opposes. Seven Pandas 11:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The car is too fast for 1/200, so in my opinion the pic is now oversharpened. --Stepro 03:36, 16 June 2019 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Seven Pandas 01:15, 19 June 2019 (UTC)