Wikimedia Commons

Commons:Featured picture candidates

Shortcut
This project page in other languages:

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things edit

Nominating edit

Guidelines for nominators edit

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs).
    • Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents edit

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs edit

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Color is important. Oversaturated colors are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or color AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio edit

Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates.

Set nominations edit

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Simple tutorial for new users edit

Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC
How to nominate in 8 simple steps

STEP 1

  • STEP 1
    STEP 1

STEP 2

  • STEP 2
    STEP 2

STEP 3

  • STEP 3
    STEP 3

STEP 4

  • STEP 4
    STEP 4

STEP 5

  • STEP 5
    STEP 5

STEP 6

  • STEP 6
    STEP 6

STEP 7

  • STEP 7
    STEP 7

STEP 8

  • STEP 8 (last step)
    STEP 8 (last step)

NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you.

Adding a new nomination edit

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".


Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports An image will only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters.

Voting edit

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use the following templates:

  • {{Support}} ( Support),
  • {{Oppose}} ( Oppose),
  • {{Neutral}} ( Neutral),
  • {{Comment}} ( Comment),
  • {{Info}} ( Info),
  • {{Question}} ( Question),
  • {{Request}} ( Request).

You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates edit

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}}  Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as a FP.
{{Delistandreplace}}  Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy edit

General rules edit

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome.
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome.
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5):
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have less than two support votes.
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.) This does not apply to nominations containing at least one ‘Alternative’ image – because it is possible that another image can overtake the one in the lead during the last days, such nominations are never closed early.
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules edit

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven  Support votes (or 7  Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, they should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite edit

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also edit

Table of contents edit

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates edit

File:013 Wild Baby Chamois Riederalp Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 27 Jan 2024 at 08:40:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Catedral Metropolitana de Sao Paulo, Brasil.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 21:44:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Another angle, another picture, another nomination --Wilfredor (talk) 23:12, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:At Tenerife 2022 085 - Gallotia galloti (cropped).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 19:29:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Grabs SG asv2022-10 Schloss Werdenberg img2.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 17:44:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Lopburi - Si Suriyothai (Sa Kaeo) roundabout, Jan 2024 02.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 15:25:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Thailand
  •   Info Si Suriyothai (also known as Sa Kaeo) roundabout, a major road junction in Lopburi, a military town in central Thailand. Yes, it was taken at the "wrong" time of day, but I like the composition with the imposing monument and the ubiquitous delivery motorcycle whizzing past so no harm in nominating, I suppose. Created, uploaded and nominated by me -- BigDom (talk) 15:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- BigDom (talk) 15:25, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support I have a feeling that others will consider this picture to have 'insufficient wow' but personally I like that you can see how this monument is situated in quite mundane surroundings, it's interesting and unusual. Add to that very strong image quality and I think this deserves a star. Cmao20 (talk) 16:28, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Crab-eating macaque (Macaca fascicularis), Monkey Forest Ubud Ubuan Bali.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 15:37:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:016 Wild Golden Eagle in flight at Pfyn-Finges (Switzerland) Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 08:23:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Jal Mahotsav Traditional Dance of Madhya Pradesh.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 07:54:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

Oak (winter, spring, summer, autumn) edit

Voting period ends on 26 Jan 2024 at 00:23:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  •  
    Winter
  •  
    Spring
  •  
    Summer
  •  
    Аutumn
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Russia#Volga Federal District
  •   Info created by Sage Ekchard - uploaded by Sage Ekchard - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- JukoFF (talk) 00:23, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support A cool concept. Urban Versis 32KB ⚡ (talk | contribs) 00:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Summer and autumn are smaller than winter and spring, but it's OK. --Laitche (talk) 01:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Great! The idea to take photos of one and the same tree in all seasons is not new, but this is the first view from above with this concept I have ever seen. And it’s a beautiful one – not just the mighty oak, but that it’s surrounded by younger trees … Of course it would be even better if the framing was always the same, and the summer and autumn photos show strong sharpening – but given the overall impact that’s nitpicking. --Aristeas (talk) 08:48, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Ermell (talk) 08:56, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support for the set. Very nice and convincing in the overall context of the series. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Great idea. But the images all have a different orientation and size. It would work much better if the images are rotated and cropped to simulate just one PoV. All done, this would make a nice block of 4. Will oppose if not changed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    You know from a quadrocopter it is difficult to fix an invariable point, moreover, I will say, it is not possible at all.) JukoFF (talk) 15:12, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'm sure you are right - hence the need for editing if you want a matched set. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 11:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support — Draceane talkcontrib. 11:29, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Great idea yet poor implementation. Low resolution of the summer and autumn part, the autumn part is unsharp too, poor description and categories. --A.Savin 11:38, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Sorry, nice concept, but autumn pic has imo not FP quality. -- Ivar (talk) 16:06, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose I would support the winter and spring pictures if nominated as a set, but trying to make it a four-seasons thing has been overambitious IMO. The winter and spring ones are high resolution, good quality, and recognisably the same framing. The other two are much lower resolution and framed differently, and the autumn one is not FP quality, the summer one barely is. Cmao20 (talk) 16:22, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support - Great idea. Yes, it would be better if they were all the same size and perfectly lined up, but the "wow" factor here is huge as far as I'm concerned, so I don't mind looking past some technical problems. My favorite thing I've seen at FPC in a while. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:46, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support: per Rhododendrites --The Cosmonaut (talk) 17:17, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support A clear FP set. ★ 21:18, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:37, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support: per Rhododendrites. --Alu (talk) 08:48, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Cangrejo ermitaño (Dardanus gemmatus) con anémonas (Calliactis polypus), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-16, DD 64.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2024 at 19:58:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Trees rising out of Cheow Lan Lake, blue sky, eternal summer in Surat Thani.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2024 at 20:50:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Thailand
  •   Info Old submerged Dipterocarp trees on Cheow Lan Reservoir Lake in Surat Thani, Thailand. All by -- Argenberg (talk) 20:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC).Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Argenberg (talk) 20:50, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support JukoFF (talk) 00:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak oppose The subject is cut out. More space is needed at the top, in my opinion, as part of the composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:08, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Yes; and little detail anywhere. Colours may not have been improved by reedit. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:37, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak oppose per Basile, sorry - I think this is a good idea and an interesting subject but it does bother me that the subject is cut at the top and I think it's the kind of image where I'd like to see a wider panorama Cmao20 (talk) 12:21, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment It’s more scratching than cutting. A very small part of the tree is out of sight, a little branch, probably half a metre long or so, a tiny fraction of its tall height. So it's more of a scratch than a cut. I think I like how it’s scratching. --Argenberg (talk) 21:37, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative edit

 

  •   Info: I propose this alternative with cloned sky and the tree branch. I also removed a large dust spot. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 01:49, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment As far as I know (from many related discussions), alternatives should be proposed or granted by the original nominator. Other versions can of course be suggested, but as links only -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:23, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I see; this isn't really defined by the rules, and I wasn't a part of these discussion. If the nominator objects, I'll certainly remove it. --The Cosmonaut (talk) 02:40, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Head of Grey Heron with neck bent, January 2024 - 7630.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2024 at 18:58:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Apologies, I was just guessing and wanted to help. Probably the sharpened section was generated in a different way. Anyway, I personally try not to be a pixelpeeper, so I'm voting:   Support as described above. With my very best regards :) -- Radomianin (talk) 23:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Do not worry about it, I believe you are not a pixelpeeper :-) --Laitche (talk) 23:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Interesting point, Charles. For high resolution, high-quality images, pixel peeping is certainly okay to some extent. Unless it's an image where the "wow" effect is more important than a lower technical quality by default. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:40, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Agreed. I still pixel-peeped JJ Harrison's rare ground-cuckoo and Giles Laurent's deer (current noms); saw the flaws; then quickly supported due to the Wow! But for common birds, like the grey heron or moorhen noms, I expect a lot more. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:09, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:27, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support per Radomianin. The bent neck is great. Would also make a nice internet meme, e.g. combined with the words of some politican who says today the opposite of what he said yesterday ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 08:39, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Ornge C-GYNP.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2024 at 16:21:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Мало девојче со сини очи.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2024 at 08:35:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • I don't know. There's also an acne below the left eye. The good thing is that the author didn't remove them, which would give the face an unrealistic look.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 08:29, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The photographer uploaded the picture but the {{PR}} template was added by someone else. I don't mind the little red spot, but at full size the wound with the wrinkled skin reveals a sort of scab that is quite unsightly. And in the possible case where this visible mark was ignored by the subject or even undesirable, then the promotion of this picture (which will automatically be a future candidate at the POTY competition) could cause embarrassment. There are many pictures of different children in the series. Of course, in case where it is a permanent characteristic and therefore an assumed identity part, the portrait is different. However, nothing guarantees that this detail goes unnoticed in the other case -- Basile Morin (talk) 09:11, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Would you enjoy a picture of you with herpes buttons published on Commons, so that anyone can use it in newspapers, for example to illustrate an article about herpes? Don't forget that everybody are allowed to add the Category:Human herpesvirus infections if it happens to be true. And idem everybody are allowed to crop the image to zoom on the face close-up -- Basile Morin (talk) 12:03, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • That's a personal thing. If the author provides consent that the picture can be used, there's no reason to be afraid of the consequences (BTW, it's debatable whether it's herpes or a healing wound). I was once shot with a large acne on my cheek for my graduation from primary school long time ago, and I didn't want to get it removed because my face would look very unnatural. I don't regret it at all.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

​*  Oppose as above. What is Wikimedia policy? Should potentially unauthorized images of children be nominated for speedy deletion? Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:14, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

  •   Comment The author was contacted and will upload a letter of consent for all portraits. A general concern was raised regarding the vague policies and the lack of apparent mechanism that photographers should follow to upload their letters of consent, so there are questions on where the document should be deposited, what should be the language, should there be a signature and who will check its veracity? (To be frank, these things are unclear even for me as a long-time contributor, probably because I haven't been interested very much in portrait photography.)--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:01, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pferdekopfeiche, Ivenack, NW view.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2024 at 04:50:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Shown here May 22, 2013, is an aerial view of homes destroyed by a tornado in Moore, Okla 130522-F-IE715-292.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 25 Jan 2024 at 03:05:54 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Short-beaked echidna (Tachyglossus aculeatus setosus) Scottsdale.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 22:36:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Sumatran Ground-Cuckoo 0A2A4427.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 14:59:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • The Sumatran ground cuckoo is a critically endangered bird. There are fewer than 250 in the world right now and perhaps as few as 50, and those numbers are thought to be decreasing. It is one of the most endangered species in the world and there was not a single sighting of it for most of the twentieth century.
  • It is a ground forager, so even if it were a more common bird, it would be challenging to get a good photo.
  • This image is 21 megapixels and is not only the best image of the bird on Commons (indeed, the only one on Commons) but by a long way the best on the internet.

File:Common Moorhen 2023 11 11 03.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 13:42:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Eurasian Spoonbill Walking Ranganathittu Karnataka Jan24 A7C 09151.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 08:49:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Chester A. Arthur by Abraham Bogardus.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 06:58:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Rapids in mountain stream Brancla. 14-09-2023. (actm.) 08.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 24 Jan 2024 at 05:35:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Natural/Switzerland#Grisons (Graubünden)
  •   Info Mountain tour from Val Sinestra to Zuort. Rapids in mountain stream Brancla. Personally, I really like the layered colors of the wet boulders.
    All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose I do not find this exceptional, it is much below the bar of the images in the gallery. --Tagooty (talk) 08:33, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Not the most obviously exceptional photo but looking at for a bit I think it has a certain grandeur. I like the striations in the rocks and I think it conveys the power of the rapids. Cmao20 (talk) 18:41, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Cmao20 couldn't have described it better. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Per Tagoty. -- Karelj (talk) 11:31, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 22:29, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Many rocks and pebbles have lines or patterns, so this one doesn't seem fundamentally different to me from any other. Although pleasant to look at, these falls are not really breathtaking. The bottom crop is too tight. It looks like the stones in the foreground are both present and absent, like an indecision on whether to include or exclude them, and so they are just cut short. The little piece of branch at the upper left also looks weird in the composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Assuming you use a tripod which was essential, you are being let down by your camera, I'm afraid. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Caracas building.jpg (delist) edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 23:56:02
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

  •   Info According to this Village Pump discussion, the picture is actually faked -- seems like in reality the same facade looks (as of 2016) like this, few in common with the "sterile" view on the featured photo (also from 2016); that said, out of scope for me and cannot be kept as featured. (Original nomination)
  •   Delist --A.Savin 23:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist Yeah, sadly having read that discussion I'm pretty convinced the building never actually looked like this Cmao20 (talk) 00:42, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist Just zoom 400% and you'll notice that each pattern is exactly similar to the neighbor at a pixel level. It means that the puzzle has been created from scratch, the building does not exist, the number of rows and columns is fake. Misleading nomination (and picture of the day) because no {{Retouched}} template was indicated on the photo, nor on the voting page. Description was just "Building in downtown Caracas, Venezuela". It should be something like "Photo manipulation, same motif copy-pasted 990 times" (=56x18-18) -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:49, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Basile Morin: - Yes, as I noted when I originally raised the issue, every single panel (for example) has the same faint white spot and the exact same faint but noticeable pattern of "random" noise-reduction/JPEG-artifact flaws. Ditto other cut-and-pastes. Ubcule (talk) 21:36, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist , per comments above. - Jmabel ! talk 03:41, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist This is a work of computer art, not photographic art. WikiPedant (talk) 06:15, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist It is very deceiving that a long-term contributor submitted a fake image for FPC. Yann (talk) 08:26, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am not sure I understand your point. Are you complaining about the uploader or the user that nominated the file for FPC? From Hill To Shore (talk) 08:44, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Wilfredor should have mentioned this in the description prior to the nomination, and also in the nomination. By staying silent, he implicitly supported the nomination while commenting. Yann (talk) 10:35, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I can't talk when I'm sleeping, I replied in village pump how was this image created. Again inventing things in your head like that Che Guevara thing? Wilfredor (talk) 12:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Your comment that Yann linked above was made 3 days after you uploaded the image. Are you saying that by then you no longer remembered that the image was a manipulation, and thought instead that the striking uniformity was due to the obsession with order of the building's military personnel? --Julesvernex2 (talk) 12:53, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    No, I'm talking about the comment in this discussion. Wilfredor (talk) 12:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Question Thanks, @Yann for your constructive edit on the file page. According to the metadata, the Creation Tool was "Adobe Photoshop CC 2014 (Windows)" (archive). Also visible at the bottom of the file page. However, Wilfredor modified your edit to specify "Hugin". Hugin is a stitching software, and Photoshop a digital art software. In this case, hundreds of similar patches have been copied + pasted to form this giant mosaic. Easy with Photoshop and there's no trace of "Hugin" in the history. Moreover, the author says "I don't even remember the place where I took that photo", so what about the software? In 2014, "I have always been against photo retouching" is very contradictory with what happened two years later. As a result, it makes sense to me to believe what is proven, more than what is uncertain. Can we agree to restore "Photoshop" in the template? -- Basile Morin (talk) 08:07, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Basile Morin: - While we might have our own suspicions about what is and isn't more likely, we can't say for sure, so we shouldn't.
"Photoshop" in the EXIF data *could* simply indicate nothing more than its use for (e.g.) final sharpening, level adjustments, etc. of an image already processed/created elsewhere.
Or maybe not, who knows? Since it's already obvious that we're unlikely to definitively get to the bottom of how it was created regardless (unless we take on trust that Hugin *was* used), that part isn't- IMHO- worth wasting any more of our time on.
Ultimately, the details of *how* it was faked- whether via Hugin, Photoshop or something else- are less important than the indisputable fact that it *is* manipulated to the point of fakery and should be clearly tagged as such. Ubcule (talk) 21:31, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist according to nomination. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 08:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist --El Grafo (talk) 08:43, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist — Draceane talkcontrib. 09:40, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist ouch! --Aristeas (talk) 09:47, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist It is very disappointing when a fake image is passed off as real (except on 1 April). This was nominated for FP two weeks after it had been uploaded by Wilfredor. I assume Wilfredo forgot to add the retouched template on upload, treating the image as an artistic creation. But when it was nominated for FP by another user Wilfredo had every opportunity to explain, but didn't. That's not good. Are there others? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:57, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I have always tried to be clear in my nominations about the alterations. In the past I uploaded my RAWs to the commons archive, but today that project does not exist and many Raws were lost. Leave a comment here to start a withdrawal process for all my FPs from these FP categories Wilfredor (talk) 12:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist in line of the village pump discussion. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:00, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist This image was created by linking several images with Hugin creating an unreal structure --Wilfredor (talk) 12:23, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist --Adamant1 (talk) 12:51, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist according to nomination. Immanuelle ❤️💚💙 (please tag me) 15:56, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Delist as the original nominator. ★ 15:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I would like to apologize for having uploaded this image and not having warned that it was an unreal image. Back then I was a different person than I am today, I think people change over time. 8 years ago I was living in the most corrupt country in the world and I wanted to show the world my annoyance at the destruction of this country, unfortunately I was no longer living there but it was not the right medium to upload a heavily digitally altered photo. When I uploaded this photo I remember seeing the result and I liked it as a way of expressing the dictatorial regime's obsession with controlling people. However, I assume my responsibility for this image that I consider false and I would like to clarify this very well. Thanks Charles for motivate me to write this message --Wilfredor (talk) 15:46, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wilfredor: - Your description in the original 2016 upload read simply "Building in Caracas downtown, Venezuela" and nothing more. Apart from a minor grammar correction and translations- both supplied by other editors- this remained unchanged right up until yesterday *after* this controversy was raised.
You edited the page on several occasions during that time (over seven years). Yet, not once did you feel moved to update the description to even mention that it was a military/regime-related building, allude to the supposed satirical/expressive purpose of the image, nor even bother explaining what the building was. (I originally guessed that was an apartment block).
Also, your memory of all this- and your motivation- is strangely clear, considering that just yesterday at the Village Pump discussion on this controversy you said:
Since 8 years have passed since that photo, I don't even remember the place where I took that photo, but it looks pretty much like the ones you have shared.
Yesterday you didn't even remember where you took that photo, but today you suddenly (and mysteriously) do clearly remember that the building belonged to the military, who you created the image to satirise?! (I mean, I'd remember doing that, even after seven years).
It comes across very much as if- having been caught out by Yann (talk · contribs) above with evidence you were already aware of suspicions/allegations against your image at the time of the 2016 FP vote- you're now trying to reframe that comment (i.e. an overly clever aside that turned into a smoking gun) into instead meaning that the photo was somehow a protest or satire against the regime?
You know, despite there never having been any previous sign of that being your intention?
Additionally, at the Village Pump discussion, you seem to imply that the resulting image was simply a result of using the Hugin photo-stitching tool (i.e. implying that it was not intentional on your part), but Basile Morin (talk · contribs) confirmed my suspicion that Hugin would likely "not create an image from scratch with 990 repeated patterns".
Having been caught out, it now seems that you're appealing to others' forgiveness for human fallibility with comments like "I think people change over time", painting your original actions- from seven years ago- as simple misjudgement rather than dishonesty and "coming clean".
But- in light of the above- you'll perhaps understand why I remain suspicious that this is just another layer of untruths.
Ubcule (talk) 21:31, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It was intentional because I recognized that it was a false generated image and even so I did not comment anything at that time, I would like to remember more details about the generation of this image but I still do not even clearly remember the building where this photo was taken, which I do remember The thing is that I took several photos of the building to assemble them because the building was too big and was too far in front, I couldn't go further back to take the photo of the entire façade so I decided to take several photos near the building to later unify them, of course the People remember more details as they make more and more effort to remember, there is no mystery, there is no drama, the facts are that it is a false image and I have admitted, at the end of the day it is my word and you decide if you are going to believe me or No and I honestly don't care if you believe me or not, I do my part and that part is telling the truth. Wilfredor (talk) 21:59, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  Comment Just two cent. It’s easy to scold Wilfredor now, but let us remember that we, the FPC regulars and Commons regulars in general, have not covered ourselves in glory, too (I explicitly include myself). This image has been promoted to FP status in 2016 and obviously nobody (including yours truly) has ever looked closely at it. If we had, it would have been too easy to recognize that something is wrong here. So, first, we all should thank Ubcule for finally looking carefully at this image – thank you! Second, we should try to learn something from this. Obviously we should take a closer look at each FP candidate. We hold different opinions about retouching details of photos (e.g., some of us think removing some minor irritating background elements from a photo goes without mentioning, others don’t), but I guess we all agree that (1) extensive changes to the main subject of a photo, (2) inserting important details, (3) combining several completely different images to a new one or (4) creating an image from scratch (maybe using some AI engine) must be declared and described explicitly. So let’s all work together, let’s take this “Caracas building” image as an instructive example and inspect future FP candidates more carefully. Best, --Aristeas (talk) 09:49, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Pez lagarto diamante (Synodus synodus), franja marina Teno-Rasca, Tenerife, España, 2022-01-08, DD 42.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 21:33:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Jardim de Infância Ernestina Pessoa Vitória Espírito Santo Tiles 2019-5130.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 19:32:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  •   Support Thanks. It could be good also to mention these "wall tiles" in the description in English and in Portuguese. I thought they were floor tiles at first sight, and had to search on Google -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:29, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Karl Marx 001.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 15:31:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Enjoying fishing at sunrise.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 11:18:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

Palestine Rally: End The Siege, Stop the War on Gaza edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 10:07:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • I would oppose the first two because there are problems with the composition, the first one has a large out of focus area, the second has a blurred girl walking off the edge of the frame and isn’t particularly interesting anyway. The third is better composed. But I think the best of this photographer’s images of this protest is this because the composition is better, the sign is more interesting than in the third image you nominated and gives a sense of the context of the protest, and the expressions on the faces of the protestors, + the raised fist, add something. Cmao20 (talk) 13:21, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Perhaps not bad as documentary, but I don't see anything featurable, especially not as a set. Sorry. --A.Savin 12:56, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Please explain what you meant by featurable? Natsuikomin (talk) 13:02, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Not a set. Nothing special in composition. I have no idea what Commons rules are on political statements. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:24, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral The last picture is FP for me. ★ 13:38, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The first one is not FP, so not a set anyway. Yann (talk) 16:06, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Not as a set. The last one has potential, it looks like a focused and informative picture. --Thi (talk) 16:10, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Yes! @Natsuikomin: please, nominate this picture solo instead! ★ 01:24, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I would like to second that, Natsuikomin – please nominate the third one. --Aristeas (talk) 08:24, 17 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Not as a set; only 2 and 3 have potential. --SHB2000 (talk) 02:46, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Since 7th October, how someone can dares to bother normal people with supporters of Palestine terorists, which with no reason have attacked to Israel, massacred innocent civilians and killed babies in oven?! As a Czech, I stand with Israel, which is only defending itself against islamictic attempts genocide of Jews. Sorry about that guys. But this post opset me. --Phoenix CZE (talk) 07:47, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Hi Phoenix CZE, please use {{oppose}} or just {{o}} to vote against a photo, not {{delist}}. This could confuse our bot. No offence, I just want to help. Best, --Aristeas (talk) 10:30, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • a) The world's not always as "black and white" as you may be thinking. b) Any other reason to oppose apart from political ones? --A.Savin 13:59, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose It's not a set. The first is obscured by the unfocused foreground, the 2nd is just mediocre photo of a crowd on the street. The third one is closest to FP, but the placard is only focused part of the photo and the rest of the photo doesn't give any additional value. — Draceane talkcontrib. 09:01, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:UBTZ 2TE25KM-0455 Tyshljeg - Sainshand.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 23 Jan 2024 at 08:37:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Australian brushturkey (Alectura lathami) female head Atherton.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 22:11:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Adeline Ravoux, by Vincent van Gogh, Cleveland Museum of Art, 1958.31.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 18:26:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Male Bush Elephant Head Trunk Up Kafue Jul23 A7R 05195.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 07:52:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Liver yellow dog in the water looking at viewer at golden hour in Don Det Laos.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 22 Jan 2024 at 07:28:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:015 Wild Red Deer Switzerland Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg, featured edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 23:57:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Sorry but blown highlights are not "normal" at FPC. It certainly was a difficult shot, however, technically a back lit scene should be underexposed a few stops to avoid any burnt parts. There are several zones completely white, like in this nomination or that one -- Basile Morin (talk) 10:23, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'll have a closer look at it tonight once I'll have access to a computer Giles Laurent (talk) 11:34, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Done, new file uploaded (press cmd+R on keyboard to force refresh on a MacOS or F5 on Windows), I took care of highlights and CA. Giles Laurent (talk) 23:32, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support What lenses what used to perform this shoot? --Wilfredor (talk) 04:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you, it was captured with a Sony FE 200-600mm F5.6-6.3 G OSS + a LensCoat to camouflage it Giles Laurent (talk) 10:03, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Did you use any scent on your body besides camouflage? Wilfredor (talk) 15:06, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I didn't use perfumes, in order to reduce chances of beeing detected as the animals could otherwise more easily detect me by smell. But it's impossible to completely erase human smell. So when possible, I also pay attention to the direction of the wind and try not having it going in the direction of the animal (but wind direction sometimes change). During mating season you often hear the red deers before you see them so you can know in what direction they are before you see them. Giles Laurent (talk) 18:45, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 11:51, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 14:07, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 14:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support JukoFF (talk) 16:04, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Yes, as Basile said, technically with flaws, but a nice action shot. I would have cropped it a bit left and right. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:53, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Strong support Great action shot! Please don't crop, the blurry elements in the foreground make the image especially appealing. Thanks for removing the CA's and highlights. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Confirmed results:
Result: 18 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:52, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Cervidae (Deer)

File:Royal Arcade, London 2023 03.jpg, featured edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 21:36:42 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Confirmed results:
Result: 15 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:55, 18 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Interiors#United_Kingdom

File:São Paulo Metro, Bras Station 2.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 21 Jan 2024 at 03:42:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport#Metro_stations
  •   Info All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 03:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support but why black and white? I think it's a good photo with a really striking composition but I think I'd like it more if it were in colour Cmao20 (talk) 19:07, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I wanted to focus on the silhouettes and the people, the colors distract from the chaotic essence. It also does not represent a happy scene, I like the effect of coming out of the dark and seeing the illuminated ending, like escaping from an underworld of train chaos towards the real world. Wilfredor (talk) 19:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment As the photo shows the station itself (and not the trains), I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link from Rail vehicles to Metro stations; I hope this is OK. The other good possibility would be the black-and-white gallery. Hope it helps, --Aristeas (talk) 19:20, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thanks, yes its a good idea Wilfredor (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Very heavy noise at 1600 ISO (and 1/3 underexposed) with this camera. No appreciable detail at full resolution. Also the picture looks over-processed, like with too much contrast and clarity. It would be fine for a picture taken one century ago, but not in 2024, sorry -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:18, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It was a APS-C, that why dont have the ultra quality of my last pictures, however, for a dark environment and this DoF, IMHO noise is ok. I could remove the noise, however, noise is information Wilfredor (talk) 02:38, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Noise is "random variation of brightness or color information". Probably not fixable in this case (similar to this one). Concerning the aperture, F/13 on a Nikon APS-C is equivalent to F/20 on a full frame camera. Certainly excessive in this situation if you want to freeze the people. Other problem: technically all the whites are gray -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:12, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral Very nice scene, but the f/13 is a double whammy - compared to f/8, it decreases sharpness due to diffraction and increases noise due to requiring a high ISO. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 07:27, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Neutral Very nice. Black-and-white is a good solution. But IMO too much noise. --XRay 💬 11:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Tomer T (talk) 09:49, 14 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 19:12, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 12:10, 16 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The White House by James Craig Annan.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 20:49:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Added my best suggestion for the right gallery Cmao20 (talk) 22:32, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:34, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you, too. IMHO this is a good gallery link, therefore I have taken the liberty to remove the question after it (to avoid confusion). --Aristeas (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Not the greatest photo ever ;–), but assuming that, as quoted in the description, this is “an important and early example of an image that is both a formal composition and casual snapshot”. Excellent restauration. --Aristeas (talk) 10:22, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support in line with Aristeas' stated reason; historically valuable. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:24, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Yann (talk) 20:44, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:21, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 13:52, 15 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Луна и море.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 18:58:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Cathedral of Gniezno (20).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 14:00:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
Thanks!   Support --Laitche (talk) 23:11, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Good composition, quality and light Cmao20 (talk) 17:00, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support ★ 17:57, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The bright light in the foreground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:15, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 06:12, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose The ugly (industrial) lantern in the foreground seems to be the main subject of the photograph. Too distracting in the composition, in my opinion. I would suggest to propose an alternative with the building only in its blue hour sky. Two possibilities: 1) cropped at the bottom and unchanged width, 2) cropped at the bottom and tighter framing, from the right of the leftmost lantern to the left of the naked tree (2743 x 4268 px only but nice aspect). See notes -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose per others: distracting light and also for me a bit unbalanced composition. Sure the blue hour light is nice, but I'm missing something more. I'm sorry, but for me it's just QI. --Kadellar (talk) 10:15, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose as per others. The foreground light is distracting. Yann (talk) 11:02, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative edit

 
@Laitche, Cmao20, ArionStar, Charlesjsharp, Llez, Basile Morin, Kadellar, and Yann: new version uploaded. Tournasol7 (talk) 16:51, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:The Lion nebula.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 20 Jan 2024 at 01:18:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Astronomy#Nebulae
  •   Info As before when nominating this author’s work I would like to note that this image has not been created by NASA or a similar space agency, it is the work of an amateur photographer with an account on Commons using a commercially available camera, telescope and software. The author leaves his very interesting commentary on each image he creates on the file page. I don’t think this disclaimer is necessary - I would still support this image if it were created by the Hubble Telescope - but I wouldn’t be so interested in nominating it then. I think it’s wonderful that work like this is possible by a skilled amateur and that it’s being made available to us under a Commons compatible license. created by Ram samudrala - uploaded by Ram samudrala - nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 01:18, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment Seems very oversaturated when compared with others on Google search. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:54, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Comment I think it is worth pointing out that I’m not sure categories like ‘oversaturated’ are really that meaningful in astrophotography. This image, like every image from the Hubble Space Telescope or the JWST, is false colour, it has started out black and white and the colour has then been added back by the author, who has observed the nebula over a long period of time (>60 hours) across all three colour channels using different filters and then used the dataset to reintroduce colour slowly by hand. This is not like an out of camera RAW or JPEG where the colour has been pumped up too high.
As for whether the colours are ‘correct’, this is subjective. They are certainly not ‘natural’ in the sense that this is not what the nebula would look like if you saw it by eye through a telescope, and in that sense the pics you have Googled are probably more ‘accurate.’ But neither is any image from Hubble or the JWST. When I first saw Jupiter through my own telescope I was surprised how muted the colours are compared to the glossy bright red of NASA photos. Some astrophotographers prefer to process their pictures to look as close to what they personally see out of a telescope as possible. Ram Samudrala prefers instead to use the ‘Hubble palette’, in which he tries to imitate the colour palette used by Hubble as closely as possible - in part because it is more aesthetically pleasing, in part because a wider colour palette allows more gradations of shades between bright and pastel, which allows him to bring out finer features of the nebula. He alludes to some of these choices in the notes on the image page. You are very welcome to vote against if you dislike the end product - FPC is subjective and if you hate it, you hate it. But I would like to point out to other potential voters that there is nothing ‘wrong’ about this authorial choice, it is merely that the author has chosen to produce a Hubble-style’ image more than a ‘natural colour’ image. Cmao20 (talk) 13:40, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Squelette de mammouth laineux (Mammuthus primigenius) en plastique phosphorescent.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 08:01:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:Foggy sunrise in High Fläming Nature Park2.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 19 Jan 2024 at 06:11:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 

File:VitorJubini Gastronomia Anchieta ES (39080737410).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2024 at 19:17:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Meals (food and drink)
  •   Info Moqueca capixaba dish served in Anchieta, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Created by Vitor Jubini (MTur Destinos) - uploaded by Sintegrity - nominated by ★ -- ★ 19:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support -- ★ 19:17, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Typical cacerola for this type of food and an environment where I can sometimes taste the salt of the sea in my mouth. Please ask me to join you --Wilfredor (talk) 19:38, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak support It could be a lot sharper but I like the composition, having the tablecloth in the foreground and the beach in the background provides a nice contrast of colours and it's suitable for a seafood dish. Cmao20 (talk) 20:16, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support A very tasty-looking dish in a good setting. (I've fixed it up a bit with sharpness, light and contrast for you.) Nice find. --Cart (talk) 22:27, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Moqueca capixaba is a traditional dish in my native state Espírito Santo, consumed especially during Easter. ★ 00:49, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Mouth watering dish well photographed --Kritzolina (talk) 07:14, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 08:57, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support Great find! Detail resolution could be even better, but it’s well-arranged, has good colours and is, above all, appetizing. Thanks to Cart for the edit! --Aristeas (talk) 09:46, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:48, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support per Aristeas. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:12, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Good shot, but still somewhat soft, plus the setting (tablecloth, background) looks rather unprofessional and random to me, though I admit this might be difficult for improvised outdoor pictures of food. --A.Savin 13:45, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I am not the creator of this photo, but, as a capixaba who I am, I suspect it was taken at a beachfront restaurant; so I believe it is really more difficult than a studio photo. ★ 14:09, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    It's difficult to predict but I believe that the back is the sea Wilfredor (talk) 04:29, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 14:08, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Weak oppose I agree, it lacks sharpness, the setting is unconvenctional but still ok to me Poco a poco (talk) 21:12, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support --Llez (talk) 06:05, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:04, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Son Doong Cave DB (2).jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2024 at 18:10:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Vietnam
  •   Info created and uploaded by Dave Bunnell, nominated by Yann
  •   Support Zoom in and check the man to have an idea of the scale. This is one of biggest cave in the world. And we don't have many FPs from Vietnam. -- Yann (talk) 18:10, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Support per nomination, a very impressive place. Cmao20 (talk) 20:13, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •   Oppose Sorry, an interesting cave, but the light is flat and not optimal to show the cave in a spectacular way. Even with the man (once you've found him), you don't really get a feel for the size of the place. Not well edited in post either, cloning/stitching errors at the borders, I'm comparing with our other FP caves at: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Caves, (you might want to change the gallery to that). Edited version if you want it. --Cart (talk) 21:58, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks. I have asked Dave if he agrees with overwriting with your version. If no answer, I will propose an alternative. Yann (talk) 10:04, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • No problem, good original to work with, but I don't think my version should be used to overwrite the original as it changes it too much. --Cart (talk) 10:23, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't understand the gallery "Natural phenomena#Caves". IMO caves are not phenomena, but places. A phenomena is a an event which takes place at a particular time. Yann (talk) 18:26, 10 January 2024 (UTC)´Reply[reply]
  • In a wider sense in English, a natural phenomena can also mean something spectacular and long-lasting that has been formed by completely by nature. I guess those who created that page went with the Wikipedia definition of the term. See: List of natural phenomena. The word "phenomena" often means a bit different things in different languages. I sure wouldn't try to implement how it is used in Swedish here. ;-) --Cart (talk) 18:44, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Well, English WP definition says A natural phenomenon is an observable event which is not man-made. I will stick with the current gallery. Yann (talk) 18:59, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • The list includes 'erosion', and caves are a subsection of Erosion landforms. The 'Natural phenomena' gallery page included even more things before, but as we've got more FPs they have been moved into new galleries. Look, I know we are in a sort of "don't use gallery pages created by Cart movement" right now, but this is not something I've made, it's been like that for years long before I started helping out with the galleries. The caves were on the 'Others' section earlier on the "natural phenomena" page, but as more of them got promoted, a section for them was created. You are of course free to select a gallery page, but to me it makes sense to have photos caves gathered in one place. --Cart (talk) 19:11, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Your edited version increases the saturation too much in relation to what the cave actually looks like, IMHO. 206.123.195.165 01:58, 12 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Oh! That was unintentional, I never touched the saturation just worked with the light a bit. It was probably a side-effect from not pushing the whites so much plus some contrast. I've de-saturated the version a bit to compensate. Thanks for your comment. --Cart (talk) 11:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Cmao20 and W.carter: See alternative below. Yann (talk) 18:20, 10 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alt edit

 

File:Windows of the gazebo (Hakkakutei) at Shitennō-ji Honbō Park, January 2024 - 6640.jpg edit

Voting period ends on 18 Jan 2024 at 17:29:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

 
  • @Cart:I think that is not my ghostly hand. I hid and using the remote controller when releasing the shutter. So I think those are trees reflected in the glass. --Laitche (talk) 22:14, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Haha! So sorry! It looks just like a hand. :-) Anyway,   Support from me too. --Cart (talk) 22:18, 9 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Poco a poco: Thanks for the comment. About 30 minutes before I took this shot, there was a period of about 10 minutes when that reflection did not occur, but I missed it. I'll try again, but I won't be able to get the shot unless the lighting is good, so I am not sure if I can nominate an alternative. --Laitche (talk) 23:36, 11 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Poco a poco: Today, I've checked from 2 hours before I took this shot to 1 hour after, but there was no time period when reflections did not occur. It seems I was wrong. There is a pond behind the camera so the surface of the pond always seems to be reflected. I uploaded one that focuses on the back window, but I don't nominate an alternative since the current nomination is better. If someday I can take a version without reflections in a different season, I'll add Delist and Replace :-) --Laitche (talk) 14:52, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • @Poco a poco: I also wanted a version without reflections, then I did it. I don't think I'd go that far if it was just for you ;-) --Laitche (talk) 18:31, 13 January 2024 (UTC)Reply[reply]


Timetable (day 5 after nomination) edit 

Sat 13 Jan → Thu 18 Jan
Sun 14 Jan → Fri 19 Jan
Mon 15 Jan → Sat 20 Jan
Tue 16 Jan → Sun 21 Jan
Wed 17 Jan → Mon 22 Jan
Thu 18 Jan → Tue 23 Jan

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting) edit 

Tue 09 Jan → Thu 18 Jan
Wed 10 Jan → Fri 19 Jan
Thu 11 Jan → Sat 20 Jan
Fri 12 Jan → Sun 21 Jan
Sat 13 Jan → Mon 22 Jan
Sun 14 Jan → Tue 23 Jan
Mon 15 Jan → Wed 24 Jan
Tue 16 Jan → Thu 25 Jan
Wed 17 Jan → Fri 26 Jan
Thu 18 Jan → Sat 27 Jan

Closing a featured picture promotion request edit

The bot edit

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure edit

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
     (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
    • Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request edit

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2024.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
  5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination edit

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}}
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/January 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=804402179"