Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 17 2021

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Indian_Farmers'_Protest_by_Ravan_Khosa_45.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Indian Farmers' Protest by Ravan Khosa. --Satdeep Gill 11:00, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
     Support Good quality. --Velvet 06:32, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
     Oppose The creator of this very good photograph is unfortunately no Commons user. Only wikimedia users can join the QI-procedure. --Hillopo2018 06:44, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose True. -- Ikan Kekek 05:55, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Direct decline. The Guidelines do not open for discussion on this issue, but state that for an image to become a QI, it "must (not "should") have been created by a Commons user".--Peulle 08:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 08:32, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Star_of_Alexeï_Guerman_on_walk_of_Actor's_Fame_of_Vyborg.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Star of Alexeï Guerman on walk of Actor's Fame of Vyborg --Reda Kerbouche 21:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --F. Riedelio 07:05, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, I disagree! If you take such photos, then as a photographer you should at least make the effort to remove dirt and objects from the monument. That is not a QI for me. --Steindy 23:54, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support OK for me. To remove birdshit before taking the picture, surely that would have been a praiseworthy job, but you hardly may demand this, IMO. --A.Savin 10:47, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support This is QIC, not FPC. --Smial 12:01, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Not a big hassle, big improvement, users would be grateful, because the shit isn't really part of the subject. Per Steindy --Milseburg 15:22, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Fine, and since when is it bad for people to photograph places as they actually are? -- Ikan Kekek 06:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 08:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Star_of_Alexeï_Petrenko_on_walk_of_Actor's_Fame_of_Vyborg.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Star of Alexeï Petrenko on walk of Actor's Fame of Vyborg --Reda Kerbouche 21:07, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --F. Riedelio 07:15, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, I disagree! If you take such photos, then as a photographer you should at least make the effort to remove dirt and objects from the monument. That is not a QI for me. --Steindy 23:54, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support OK. --A.Savin 10:50, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support This is QIC, not FPC. --Smial 12:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Ikan Kekek 06:53, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 08:25, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Poseidone_di_Aligi_Sassu_-_Rignano_sull'Arno-.jpg

[edit]

 CommentI specify that the cut on the left and bottom of the photo is mandatory due to the presence of a railing to protect the tank on which it is located. It is the only position to frame the head of the horse, the subject of the sculpture, namely Poseidon who gives the horse to the city of Athena and to bring into the frame also the Trident of the God Neptune. Having said that, I will accept your every judgment, whatever it is. Thanks in advance PROPOLI87 13:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 13:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Comment I've no problem with the lower left corner. That cut looks fine. But i would prefer a bit more space above the trident. --Zinnmann 09:38, 14 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
 CommentStarting from the original I corrected the perspective, leaving more sky above the trident. PROPOLI87 07:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 07:37, 15 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 I withdraw my nominationI withdraw my application, as I have restored the old version. PROPOLI87 12:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 12:08, 16 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

File:Firenze_-_Panorama_del_centro_storico.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Panorama of Florence -- PROPOLI87 10:44, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Palauenc05 15:09, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, resolution and quality are low. With a resolution that is a little above the minimum requirement, the image quality should be significantly higher, especially since the motif is simple. There is noise and banding in the sky. Lack of detail in the city. --Milseburg 14:12, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose agree with Milseburg -- Alvesgaspar 10:01, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Milseburg --Trougnouf 10:13, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  CommentOK, decline PROPOLI87 08:50, 13 September 2021 (UTC)PROPOLI87PROPOLI87 08:50, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 08:24, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Tsomgo_Lake,_East_Sikkim.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Tsomgo lake enveloped by cloud. -- ANKAN 10:29, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Artistic atmosphere. --Palauenc05 15:09, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Strong colour banding in the sky. Too soft otherwise. --A.Savin 11:59, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per A.Savin. -- Ikan Kekek 07:07, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per A.Savin. --Trougnouf 10:11, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per A.Savin --Jakubhal 10:51, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Oppose A remarkable subject, nice composition and interesting lighting, but the technical quality has too many flaws. Banding, sharpening- and compression artifacts, image noise. --Smial 12:23, 13 September 2021 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 08:24, 16 September 2021 (UTC)

File:Marie_Spaemann_Wiener_Kultursommer_2021_287.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Singer-songwriter Marie Spaemann, Vienna 2021 --Tsui 04:22, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Oppose Crop too tight at the top --Kritzolina 07:55, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
     Comment The crop on all sides is part of the comp­sition, empha­sising the pro­file of the face. I don't want to nudge you to change your mind! I'm just won­de­ring about the cre­teria here some­times. --Tsui 13:05, 5 Septem­ber 2021 (UTC)
 Comment If that is what you were going for, I would have preferred an even tighter crop, cutting part of the hair. You cut off a bit of the elbow, you could do the same on top. The way it is now is just making the image look cramped and not well balanced for me. --Kritzolina 07:17, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
I disagree --Granada 12:09, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Looks OK to me. QIC isn't about what might be ideal, it's merely about good photos, and this is a good photo. -- Ikan Kekek 20:12, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support As per Ikan --Isiwal 22:23, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support For me it's a great impression of the musician. Everything is just right here, the face, the contrast and the composed blurring. I also get such comments again and again and don't understand that such ratings are given here with so little empathy. It's desperate and I don't dare to nominate such photos anymore. --Steindy 10:07, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Trougnouf 10:07, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support QI for me --Jakubhal 10:52, 12 September 2021 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. No problems with the crop. -- Y.ssk 08:51, 14 September 2021 (UTC)
Total: 6 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Peulle 08:23, 16 September 2021 (UTC)