Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/April 2008

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


This is an archive for Commons:Featured picture candidates page debates and voting.
The debates are closed and should not be edited.


Image:Offroad Jeep 05760 2.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Offroad Jeep

Sorry, you should try Commons:Quality images candidates first! --Beyond silence 14:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

4 support, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Yellow-eyed Penguin MC.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

5 support, 3 neutral, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Yellow-eyed Penguin crying MC.jpg Alternative - featured

[edit]

Short description 

19 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ffm-elf.jpg - not featured

[edit]

2007: Meeting of the Eritrean Liberation Front in the German exile, the main secessionist movement in Eritrea during the 1960s and 1970s

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small and out of focus -- Alvesgaspar 21:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
1 support, 5 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 22:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Iridescent fog at Golden Gate Bridge.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Iridescent fog at Golden Gate Bridge 

1 support, 2 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 20:08, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hpim3526.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small. --norro 21:42, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 20:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nottingham Castle.JPG - not featured

[edit]

Nottingham Castle in sunset, Nottingham, UK

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of very poor photographic quality -- Alvesgaspar 18:08, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 20:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nicole Kidman Madame Tussauds.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Template:F.P.X not shure about fpx after reading the article at en.wp which is full of wax figurines --Richard Bartz 02:27, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, someone else tagged it as a copyvio (also Image:Johny Deep Madame Tussaud.jpg). Lupo 05:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: a derivative work of a copyrighted sculpture. Lupo 05:56, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
Copyright violation >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Humboldt penguin 5080.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A penguin portrait 

Nomination withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:04, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nueva Esparta Mapa Interactivo.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Nueva Esparta Mapa Interactivo

Soy el autor de todas las fotografías recortadas dentro del mapa. Sería demasiado complejo recrear una versión en SVG --libertad0 ॐ 12:31, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Neutral (changing vote) --Due to missing scale and no SVG version available. Sting 17:22, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 1 neutral >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 20:10, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Coat of arms of the British Indian Ocean Territory.svg - not featured

[edit]

British Indian Territory coat of arms

  •  Info created by Demidow - uploaded by Demidow - nominated by Demidow -- Demidow 01:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Demidow 01:26, 23 March 2008 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Is this coat of arm official and legitimate. Don't forget inhabitants of this territory had all been deported and the island transformed in a US military base. Which assembly decided of this drawing ?--B.navez 13:47, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info Hello B.navez! According to the book "Flaggen und Wappen der Welt" (Flags and Coats of Arms of the World, Gütersloh, Bertelsmann, 1992, p. 60) the arms along with the new flag (also on Commons) were granted on August 2, 1990 by the British Government in commemoration of the 25th anniversary of the territory's establishment (see also the description of the arms at English Wikipedia). The arms were also printed on an UK 24pc stamp issued in 1990 (see [1] and [2]). Although the US Army leased the island of Diego Garcia as a military base, the territory remains in British possession (see here).
    •  InfoOk, thanks for official information. It is a good drawing but apart the fact the territory is disputed, is a page of shame for UK and so featuring could be considered as not NPOV, the turtles are not credible. The left one is clearly a Hawksbill Turtle (Eretmochelys imbricata) but the right one looks like a terrestrial tortoise with marine members. Information about stamps say it should be Caretta caretta but I doubt (not known nesting there) and I'd rather think it intends to be a Green Turtle(Chelonia mydas) because of the green color and being common in this area. The original coat of arms was so badly drawn it was of no importance, but with a good drawing, accuracy of the representation makes it paradoxically wronger.--B.navez 17:16, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      •  InfoGood to know, but the turtles you see are just the ones depicted in the book cited above. I stuck closely to the drawing in this book because it is based on official documents and I myself am not too much into zoology. --Demidow, 19:34, 23 March 2008 (CET)
  •  Support Nice, detailed work. Following NPOV my vote is not affected by political issues. --norro 16:16, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - IMO if the original image have correct colors, this image isn't correct. --D kuba 12:02, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose FRZ 18:47, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support --Beyond silence 23:36, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:47, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Copal with insects.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Copal with insects

 in the favor of the one below 

Nomination withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:48, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Copal with insects close-up.jpg - featured

[edit]

Copal with insects 

6 support, 2 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Osprey landing in the nest at Camp Echockotee.JPG - featured

[edit]

Osprey repairing nest 

7 support, 3 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:49, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nueva Esparta Mapa Vial.svg - featured

[edit]

Nueva Esparta (New Sparta) is one of the 23 states (estados) of Venezuela. It comprises Margarita Island (by far the largest and most important island), Coche, and uninhabited Cubagua.

  •  Comment These images seem to give at least the feeling of being quicker to render when they have the applications namespaced instructions stripped from them; an exercise which depending on the complexity of the image can make the file size more than 2/3rds smaller without affecting the rendering of the image. -- carol 20:05, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The size has been improved of almost 5 MB to 800 kb, besides making changeable the labels, Thank you --libertad0 ॐ 18:14, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Chabacano 21:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - Nice map, this is a lot better than your previous nominations. I don't usually vote on maps but here are a couple of suggestions: (i) The symbol used for the scales of latitude and longitude, as well as for the graphic scale, is too heavy. Try something more discrete; (ii) The text fonts used for the geographic coordinates and for labelling the grid should be different in size and colour; (iii) There is little elevation information in the map, those area symbols are mainly decorative. Try to use denser hypsometric classes and/or elevation contours (not labeled this way); (iv) The map projection should be identified; (v) The symbol used to depict the main road is too heavy, try something more discrete; (vi) For this scale, much more topographic information should be provided: hydrography (rivers), natural land cover, ... -- Alvesgaspar 23:11, 23 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose --Nice work but (i) there is a little error for the South 63°55´ longitude label (it is written 63°00´) ; (ii) the filling motive for LA ASUNCIÓN´s area is bugging on the full view ; (iii) at the level of Pta. Sabaneta (North of Juan Griego) is indicated a lake where there is a hill about 188 m high ; (iv) Isla los Frailes is misplaced (centre of the island at about 63°44'W) ; (v) at Isla los Frailes is showed one island where there are at least three other much bigger than other islets represented on the map ; (vi) the general shape of the elevation is correct but well much simplified in comparison to the coastlines ; (vii) the whole text has been transformed in paths which makes the file weight heavier and complicates the translation. (viii) In the description page, it is indicated that the map was drawn wandering around with a GPS. If I can imagine that this device was used for the roads, I hardly believe it was the case for the coastlines as well as the topography for which thousands and thousands of waypoints would have been necessary in order to draw the map the way it is, so I would like to have more details about the sources used. Sting 15:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The points (i),(ii),(iii) and (vii) have been corrected in the composition --libertad0 ॐ 18:02, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, but the still ~8 km misplaced island and the missing ones makes that imo the map should be first corrected before being featured. Btw, Alvesgaspar also made very meaningful remarks. Sting 22:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have used translating but I am not able to understand what tries to be --libertad0 ॐ 16:00, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
In your map, Isla los Frailes is approximately placed at 63° 49' W while it should be 5' eastwards, at 63° 44' W. This makes a difference of about 8 km and places the island West of Punta Ballena instead of East where it is in fact. Zoom in this area with NASA World Wind (not Google Earth) and you will also see there are four other islands missing North of Isla los Frailes. Sting 19:23, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I think that it could already be solved. Excuseme, would you Be able to revise it? --libertad0 ॐ 15:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Is a good image. Daga 21:26, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I think this is a good image. It has very good information. --Snakeyes 21:28, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support That's ok. I think that (viii) is innecesary to be featured. Libertad y Saber 21:36, 25 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - This time, and after the comments by Sting, I have to make an exception and strongly oppose the promotion. The main purpose of any map is to represent geographic information as accurately as possible; it is not enough to be beautiful or to have a "professional look". A map should be a tool we could trust. In this case, we have no guarantee of quality. On the contrary, the data sources are not identified and some gross mistakes were found by Sting. More latin american votes will not make it a better map. -- Alvesgaspar 00:04, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 Comment I have not forced them to vote, it is your point of view and I respect it. But here it is spoken it is of the work and not of people that vote. The way like you say it it is racist --libertad0 ॐ 12:26, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7 support, 1 neutral, 2 oppose >> featured Alvesgaspar 07:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:061212-nordkapp.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Antarctica panorama

 Commentsorry, but this uploader cannot find any instructions - it just takes me to pp that describe what's happening, but never tells me how i can clear this up - i AM the copyrigt holder and thought i had already declared that when i submitted the image saying that i was? the source noted is also my domain - pix-now.com and all images there are mine. this image is a version of one on that site that i am releasing with the license indicated Cascoly 20:06, 24 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

6 support, 5 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Acanthodoris lutea laying eggs 1.jpg - featured

[edit]

Acanthodoris lutea laying eggs

  • I added the link to the same picture uploaded to Flickr with the notes to the description of the nominated images. May I please ask you, if you believe it is enough? Thank you.--Mbz1 16:10, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5 support, 2 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:UlvikfjordMountainsPanorama.jpg - featured

[edit]

Ulvikfjord in Western Norway 

15 support, 3 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:55, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mock mirage sunset 9-18-06.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Mock Mirage Sunset

  •  Support People trying to understand the image will be led to some good science articles. Louis Waweru 18:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It was the idea - to introduce some new knoledge, except sometimes it is really hard to do. Two of opposers never bothered to tell why they opposed the image and I am not even sure they understood what they were opposing to, and the third opposer complained about the size of the subject like the size is of any importance, when we talk about mirages. The image is not going to be featured, but at least I know I've done what I could. Thank you all for the votes and comments.--Mbz1 00:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4 support, 3 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 00:08, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:World War I Observation Balloon HD-SN-99-02269.JPEG - not featured

[edit]

WWI Military Balloonist 

3 support, 1 neutral, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 00:09, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Short description 

4 support, 7 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 00:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mount Kota Kinabalu.JPG - not promoted

[edit]

Mount Kinabalu in East Malaysia

Sorry, you should try Commons:Quality images candidates first! --Beyond silence 23:34, 29 March 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

1 support, 2 oppose >> not promoted (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 22:53, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Short description 

result: 6 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Lijealso 03:20, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Short description

Which FP is similar? What is wrong about artistic shots? --AngMoKio 14:07, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I speaking about many FP conteyour (may false spelling) photos. --Beyond silence 17:47, 26 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
pls read guidelines before starting to vote. There is no encyclopedic value needed. --AngMoKio 18:38, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
result: 9 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral => not featured. Lijealso 03:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Short description 

result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => not featured. Lijealso 03:31, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

One of the first german stamps under Magnifying Glass

Otherwise so nice composition... --Beyond silence 13:33, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
result: 7 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => featured. Lijealso 03:35, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Iceberg with hole1.jpg

[edit]

Iceberg

  •  InfoIcebergs around Cape York,Greenland. The icebergs are beautiful and display many interesting shapes. You could see the iceberg with a hole at the image. The hole was caused by weathering effects - erosion by waves, wind and melting.
  • It looks to me that the streets of Europe are flooded with icebergs. That's why the nominated iceberg image,which was photographed in High w:Arctic, never had a chance to generate a "wow factor" with many of our European voters. I guess the only thing which is left for my poor iceberg, is to melt in my own tears :,-( May I please thank you all for the comment and for the votes?--Mbz1 14:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    You still (just) have 2/3 majority support, so cheer up! -- Slaunger 15:01, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  

result: 8 support, 7 oppose, 0 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Nilas Sea Ice1.jpg

[edit]

Nilas sea ice

  •  Info Nilas Sea Ice sea ice w:Buffin Bay w:Arctic.
    Have you ever wondered how an ocean gets frozen? Here's the answer:
    In calm water, the first sea ice to form on the surface is a skim of separate crystals which initially are in the form of tiny discs, floating flat on the surface and of diameter less than 2-3 mm. Each disc has its c-axis vertical and grows outwards laterally. At a certain point such a disc shape becomes unstable, and the growing isolated crystals take on a hexagonal, stellar form, with long fragile arms stretching out over the surface. These crystals also have their c-axis vertical. The dendritic arms are very fragile, and soon break off, leaving a mixture of discs and arm fragments. With any kind of turbulence in the water, these fragments break up further into random-shaped small crystals which form a suspension of increasing density in the surface water, an ice type called frazil or grease ice. In quiet conditions the frazil crystals soon freeze together to form a continuous thin sheet of young ice; in its early stages, when it is still transparent, it is called nilas. When only a few centimetres thick this is transparent (dark nilas) but as the ice grows thicker the nilas takes on a grey and finally a white appearance. The image was taken from an w:icebreaker.
  • The subject of the image is Nilas sea ice, and you are right, it is amazing! Nilas sea ice is very, very rarely photographed (I could not find any image on Flikr). The side of icebreaker was added to the image in order to compare the ice to the people and a ship. Other angle was all, but impossible. May I please ask you, if you'd rather prefer an image with only ice and no ship like for example this one ? Thanks.--Mbz1 00:59, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  

result: 2 support, 4 oppose, 0 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:22 degrees halo 03-29-08.jpg

[edit]

22 degrees halo

  

result: 2 support, 0 oppose, 1 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:22 degrees halo 3-29-08 2.jpg - not featured

[edit]

22 degrees halo 

1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 08:28, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 

Image:Pim Island Arctica.jpg

[edit]

Short description

  • No I am not. It is the location I found, when I did a search at Google. It is hard to get locations for such remote places. Maybe somebody could help me with the location? Thank you.--Mbz1 21:42, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I made the correction focusing on Pim island. If you manage to recognize the exact place on the island, you may change the location data. --B.navez 18:16, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  

result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ice crystals.jpg

[edit]

Ice crystals

  

result: 2 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:57, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mammatus clouds 2008-04-01.jpg

[edit]

Mammatus clouds

  • have you ever seen them yourself?

  

result: 3 support, 5 oppose, 0 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Mammatus clouds 2008-04-01 2.jpg

[edit]

Mammatus clouds

  

result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:56, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Artist's Palette in Death Valley NP.jpg

[edit]

Short description

  

result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral => Withdrawn by nominator Mbz1. Not featured. Richard Bartz 16:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Reflection in a soap bubble.jpg

[edit]

Soap bubble

 in a favor of a much better edit by User:Alvesgaspar 

Nomination withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 09:30, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]


Image:Reflection_in_a_soap_bubble_edit.jpg - featured

[edit]

Soap bubble 

14 support, 1 neutral >> featured (before something else happens...) -- Alvesgaspar 22:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pano Manhattan2007 amk.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

too snall for what? --AngMoKio 18:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2 support, 5 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:10, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Felix2 (by Peter Klashorst).jpg - not featured

[edit]

Painting by Peter Klashorst 

0 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 08:26, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Skull with a Burning Cigarette.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

Look like the contrast is too low. --Beyond silence 13:39, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 08:11, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gull 5141.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A gull portrait 

1 support, 1 neutral >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 08:12, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Narcissus pseudonarcissus flower – side.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Narcissus pseudonarcissus flower (side-view)

 Comment It is already a QI candidate. The composition was intended to be like that for the reason that it shouldn´t just show the flower (as most other pictures here do) rather than the profile of the plant. --Agadez 17:19, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 3 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day)-- Alvesgaspar 08:13, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Caucasus-ethnic en.svg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

3 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:43, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pigeon portrait 4861.jpg - featured

[edit]

A close up portrait of a rock pigeon 

6 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:47, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Erdfunkstelle Raisting 2.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description

fixed --Richard Bartz 15:16, 30 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
 12 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Lafleur Homestead.JPG - Alvesgaspar 14:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit]

Historic guest house. 

1 support, 3 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 14:29, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sultana Disaster.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Sultana explodes carrying Union soldiers released from prison camps in 1865, the greatest maritime disaster in U.S. history

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small -- Alvesgaspar 22:56, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:44, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Beam and feet (close shot).jpg - not featured

[edit]

 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

βαςεLXIV™ 12:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

0 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:45, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:The Bath.JPG - not featured

[edit]

Door to the gas chambers (and bath) in Majdanek.

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of poor phtographic quality Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:46, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Louis XVI et Marie-Antoinette.jpg

[edit]

The tombs of last french kind and queen, Louis XV and the famous Marie-Antoinette

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small --Richard Bartz 20:07, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
0 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) --Richard Bartz 23:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cargo loading, Operation Deep Freeze 2007 070208-N-4868G-323.JPEG

[edit]

Navy sailors loading cargo onto a ship in Antarctica

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

-- Alvesgaspar 14:32, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) --Richard Bartz 23:26, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hoverfly March 2008-1.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

4 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 12:22, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Formica cf lugubris 3.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

10 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Auchenorrhyncha Anaglyph.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description             Just a comparison of sizes, not for vote :-)

  •  Info created, uploaded & nominated by -- Richard Bartz 15:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info You need an Anaglyph (3-D glasses) to view this image
  •  Info The result of a stack of 172 images to expand the dof (to bring out the tiniest details).
  •  Support Very hard work. Can it match with bad copyvio Nicole Kidman, which has faded away ? :-)) -- Richard Bartz 15:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Mbz1 15:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Am I the only one who does not own Anaglyphs? I think it could be of relevance to provide also a 2D version for us pour Anaglyph-depleted souls. As I understand the process you really combine two images (or selected colour layers thereof) (each of which must have been generated from 86(?) images to get a good DOF). Could we see one of the two DOF-deep images? (And if I have misunderstood everything, just ignore my question). I'd really like to see it as it seems you have pushed your equipment to the max here. -- Slaunger 21:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anaglyph owners should have a entitlement to a reward, so you have to settle for the size comparision picture in 2d ;-) --Richard Bartz 21:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Dang. I will put it on my wishlist for my birthday. Only eight more months....can hardly wait. As a matter of fact I like the 2D comparison image a lot. Only a pity the resolution is not higher. It is really amusing to look at the interplay between the insect and the stitch. -- Slaunger 21:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Photoshop for 3d. Helicon Focus for DoF --Richard Bartz 11:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll have a look at Helicon Focus. Anyway,  Support. --MichaelMaggs 15:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
8 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 23:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 2.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description

No over-exposed areas? Perfect? I think where there is light the photo is too bright, where is shadow (much on iceberg) is too dark. --Beyond silence 20:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support On my screen, the balance between light and dark is perfect: the whites are bright but not overexposed, and the shadows are certainly not too dark. I suppose people see images in a different way, because their screens are not calibrated in the same way. I support this nice picture, although the sharpness of the lower right part is not really excellent. -- MJJR 20:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I don't quite understand this one. At f6.3 and at that distance the whole image should be sharp, but in fact only the left-hand edge is. As you move across to the right the details get more and more blurred. --MichaelMaggs 08:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it is because in reality the two sides of the iceberg are at quite different distances (although it appears to be taken from the side). I guess the auto-focus has caugth the left hand side of the iceberg leading to the observation you have. I had to photograph it quickly as a "target of oppertunity", and I had no control of the ship as it was on an official assignment (not a tourist trip). Thus, the nominated image and this image differ by one minut (the resolution) in their EXIFs, meaning I had no second chances to check the sharpess of the shots. In addition, I do not have a DSLR. Although I am really amazed by the capability of my small compact camera, the technical quality will not be on par with most FPCs. I am not trying to excuse sub-optimal technical quality. I would just like to explain the circumstances. It is up to the individual reviewer to consider if the rarity of the subject and the circumstances mitigates these observations, and I respect your stance. -- Slaunger 09:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    To me it looks as if you have a bit of dirt or maybe a water drop on the right side of your lense. With the small lenses of a compact camera this can have a big effect on the photo. You should check your lense. The coastline behind the iceberg should have the same sharpness but it hasn't. I also had that problem with my compact Canon...and a lense cleaning resulted in an impressive improvement of the photo quality :) --AngMoKio 08:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for this advice AngMoKio. That may be another root cause. I know this is really off-topic, but how did you clean the lens? -- Slaunger 11:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    well a difficult topic. Depends a bit what kind of dirt you have. I had a part of a finger print on the lense and removed it with a little bit of warm water and a paper towel. Important is that you dont press and rub hard...otherwise you can scratch the lense. There should be special cleaning kits available. The way i did it was for sure not the best. Cleaning my lenses and the sensor is sth i postpone all the time, because i am scared of it :) --AngMoKio 20:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the explanation. It seems simpler than I had feared. -- Slaunger 21:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Still be very careful! --AngMoKio 21:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I always get a UV filter for all my lenses. They're much easier to clean, and you don't care if you scratch one of those. Also, I have a rubber air-blower that works pretty well. --Dori - Talk 21:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Mfield 15:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Low quality, not sharp enough. --Karelj 18:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral - I'm torn. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 20:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I would have supported without issue raised by Michael Maggs and AngMoKio. The right part is very soft, even after downsampling. :( Benh 18:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I do agree with Benh that the right part is unsharp, which I put down to a camera issue (it happened to me as well, guess why I had my camera repaired). Personally for me the wow overcompensates this. -- Klaus with K 21:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support A nice ice berg. Some reviewers seem to have problems with their screens. Have a look at the histogram: This image is perfectly exposed. However the right side is a bit unsharp but this doesn't surprise me on a compact camera. --Ikiwaner 22:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
8 support, 2 neutral, 4 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Formica cf lugubris 3.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

10 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:18, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Auchenorrhyncha Anaglyph.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description             Just a comparison of sizes, not for vote :-)

  •  Info created, uploaded & nominated by -- Richard Bartz 15:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info You need an Anaglyph (3-D glasses) to view this image
  •  Info The result of a stack of 172 images to expand the dof (to bring out the tiniest details).
  •  Support Very hard work. Can it match with bad copyvio Nicole Kidman, which has faded away ? :-)) -- Richard Bartz 15:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Mbz1 15:16, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Am I the only one who does not own Anaglyphs? I think it could be of relevance to provide also a 2D version for us pour Anaglyph-depleted souls. As I understand the process you really combine two images (or selected colour layers thereof) (each of which must have been generated from 86(?) images to get a good DOF). Could we see one of the two DOF-deep images? (And if I have misunderstood everything, just ignore my question). I'd really like to see it as it seems you have pushed your equipment to the max here. -- Slaunger 21:03, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Anaglyph owners should have a entitlement to a reward, so you have to settle for the size comparision picture in 2d ;-) --Richard Bartz 21:26, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Dang. I will put it on my wishlist for my birthday. Only eight more months....can hardly wait. As a matter of fact I like the 2D comparison image a lot. Only a pity the resolution is not higher. It is really amusing to look at the interplay between the insect and the stitch. -- Slaunger 21:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Photoshop for 3d. Helicon Focus for DoF --Richard Bartz 11:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I'll have a look at Helicon Focus. Anyway,  Support. --MichaelMaggs 15:33, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
8 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 23:16, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Iceberg with hole near sanderson hope 2007-07-28 2.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description

No over-exposed areas? Perfect? I think where there is light the photo is too bright, where is shadow (much on iceberg) is too dark. --Beyond silence 20:02, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support On my screen, the balance between light and dark is perfect: the whites are bright but not overexposed, and the shadows are certainly not too dark. I suppose people see images in a different way, because their screens are not calibrated in the same way. I support this nice picture, although the sharpness of the lower right part is not really excellent. -- MJJR 20:42, 1 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I don't quite understand this one. At f6.3 and at that distance the whole image should be sharp, but in fact only the left-hand edge is. As you move across to the right the details get more and more blurred. --MichaelMaggs 08:51, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it is because in reality the two sides of the iceberg are at quite different distances (although it appears to be taken from the side). I guess the auto-focus has caugth the left hand side of the iceberg leading to the observation you have. I had to photograph it quickly as a "target of oppertunity", and I had no control of the ship as it was on an official assignment (not a tourist trip). Thus, the nominated image and this image differ by one minut (the resolution) in their EXIFs, meaning I had no second chances to check the sharpess of the shots. In addition, I do not have a DSLR. Although I am really amazed by the capability of my small compact camera, the technical quality will not be on par with most FPCs. I am not trying to excuse sub-optimal technical quality. I would just like to explain the circumstances. It is up to the individual reviewer to consider if the rarity of the subject and the circumstances mitigates these observations, and I respect your stance. -- Slaunger 09:39, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    To me it looks as if you have a bit of dirt or maybe a water drop on the right side of your lense. With the small lenses of a compact camera this can have a big effect on the photo. You should check your lense. The coastline behind the iceberg should have the same sharpness but it hasn't. I also had that problem with my compact Canon...and a lense cleaning resulted in an impressive improvement of the photo quality :) --AngMoKio 08:55, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for this advice AngMoKio. That may be another root cause. I know this is really off-topic, but how did you clean the lens? -- Slaunger 11:11, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    well a difficult topic. Depends a bit what kind of dirt you have. I had a part of a finger print on the lense and removed it with a little bit of warm water and a paper towel. Important is that you dont press and rub hard...otherwise you can scratch the lense. There should be special cleaning kits available. The way i did it was for sure not the best. Cleaning my lenses and the sensor is sth i postpone all the time, because i am scared of it :) --AngMoKio 20:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Thank you for the explanation. It seems simpler than I had feared. -- Slaunger 21:03, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    Still be very careful! --AngMoKio 21:06, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    I always get a UV filter for all my lenses. They're much easier to clean, and you don't care if you scratch one of those. Also, I have a rubber air-blower that works pretty well. --Dori - Talk 21:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Mfield 15:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Low quality, not sharp enough. --Karelj 18:40, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral - I'm torn. --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 20:16, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I would have supported without issue raised by Michael Maggs and AngMoKio. The right part is very soft, even after downsampling. :( Benh 18:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support I do agree with Benh that the right part is unsharp, which I put down to a camera issue (it happened to me as well, guess why I had my camera repaired). Personally for me the wow overcompensates this. -- Klaus with K 21:59, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support A nice ice berg. Some reviewers seem to have problems with their screens. Have a look at the histogram: This image is perfectly exposed. However the right side is a bit unsharp but this doesn't surprise me on a compact camera. --Ikiwaner 22:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
8 support, 2 neutral, 4 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:54, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Humboldt penguin 5080 edit.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

7 support, 1 neutral, 6 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:26, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:SantaBarbaraSunrise 4823.jpg - featured

[edit]

Stearn Wharf at sunrise 

5 support, 1 neutral, 2 oppose >> featured Alvesgaspar 20:25, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Short description 

13 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:27, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bee March 2008-11.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

6 support, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:28, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Dogviolet6.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Viola adunca 

1 support, 2 oppose > not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 08:53, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sunrise @ Nueva Ecija.JPG - not featured

[edit]

Nueva Ecija Sunrise

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of very poor quality (noise and artifacts) -- Alvesgaspar 21:35, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:56, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kiowa Blackberry Edit.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Kiowa Blackberry (edited) Blackberry Composite Image

  •  Info Created, uploaded, and nominated by IG-64. Same as the above submission, only digitally composited with another image with a different focus. To the right is the other image (not up for featured picture vote) used to create the composite. As you can see, several things, including the perspective, have been altered to match the original. --IG-64 20:02, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- IG-64 19:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral Nice attempt, but I have higher expectations for a composite. I would recommend doing one out of 4 images as 2 are not enough. Freedom to share 16:49, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 1 neutral >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 22:51, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Kiowa Blackberry.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Kiowa Blackberry

Sorry, you should try Commons:Quality images candidates first! --Beyond silence 12:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

3 support, 1 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:53, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Plato + Giovanardi Snetterton 2007.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A BTCC race at Snetterton in 2007, and championship contenders Jason Plato and Fabrizio Giovanardi collide at turn 1. 

1 support, 4 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:54, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ataturk-1930-amongpublic.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Mustafa Kemal Atatürk, the founder and first president of the Republic of Turkey during one of his national tours

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Lycaon 15:04, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 11:30, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anolis carolinensis brown.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Green anole (Anolis carolinensis) in brown phase. 

3 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:47, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Zunderschwamm Fomes fomentarius.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

There is no difference between flowers, mushrooms or even insects 4 me. --Richard Bartz 18:41, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
This one has subtly beauty and tech subtlety. It's a mood picture .. shurely not flamboyant but if you drink a glass of wine or maybe two (hicks) the mushroom will come ... and take you 2 a higher place :-) MUSHROOM IS EARTH --Richard Bartz 23:08, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4 support, 3 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pelican 4944.jpg - featured

[edit]

Young brown pelican in flight 

10 support, 3 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:50, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Grand Anse-La Digue-Seychellen.jpg - featured

[edit]

Grand Anse, La Digue, Seychelles 

8 support, 1 neutral, 2 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:51, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anse Source d'Argent-La Digue-Seychellen.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Anse Source d'Argent, La Digue, Seychelles

  •  Info created, uploaded and nominated by -- Tobi 87 17:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Tobi 87 17:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Mbz1 18:09, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose IMO people in the picture breaks harmony of the nature. --QWerk 18:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    IMO nothing could break the harmony of such remote, unique and beautiful island as Ladigue is, even "oppose" votes.--Mbz1 21:12, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Agree with Qwerk. Would have supported otherwise. Benh 19:29, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info I took another panorama of the same place without people. Hopefully it looks fine! You will see. - Tobi 87 21:07, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Maybe image should be little bit more darker, but is nice. --Karelj 21:39, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support with people who give the scale (the way to realise hugeness of the granit stones) and the realistic genuine vision of this place (a famous touristic place close to an inhabited village : what is extraordinary in Seychelles is that this kind of wonderful landscape is not in remote, unspoiled and inaccessible locations or in reserved and private areas, it is an ordinary and public sight. So, removing people would be a lie. Attitude of tourists on the picture is also very typical : they have just left the boat and they can't figure out this is just real, they are still dressed, not with bathing clothes.) --B.navez 01:50, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose composition doesn't convince me. But it has a good quality. --AngMoKio 15:29, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose - I'm with AngMokio, don't like the foreground -- Alvesgaspar 18:04, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Picture has not a good composition. What is the subject? The beach or the rocks? If the subject is the beach the the rocks are too dominant. If the rocks are the motif a picture with more detail of them would be nicer --Simonizer 08:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • upsetting comment and so conformist : we could also choose between the sea and the beach, the sea and the sky and why not just a white picture ?--B.navez 17:03, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • I don't see anything upseting about that comment. I think Simonizer is right. The composition is confusing. The eye doesn't really know where to rest. The rocks might look better in a vertical shot. The beach might look nicer if there would be more of the beach and water visible and only a bit of the rocks as a frame on the right side. --AngMoKio 17:23, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • So please tell me where shall I put the image border? Or would it be sufficient to displace my point of view to the left so that more beach and sea is visible. Then, the rocks would form a frame on the right. --Tobi 87 17:37, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well this depends a bit on the surroundings there. But you see your picture is split in half. One half is beach and water, the other half is rocks. A classical composition would be to have 2/3 beach&water and 1/3 rocks. The horizon of your picture is already placed quite well because it also divides the picture in 1/3 sky and 2/3 rest. Of course those "rules" can also get broken...it is not a must...but it is often helpful.--AngMoKio 20:52, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4 support, 5 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:53, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anse Source d'Argent 2-La Digue.jpg - featured

[edit]

Anse Source d'Argent, La Digue, Seychelles 

7 support, 2 neutral, 2 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:54, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Galerie Colbert.jpg - featured

[edit]

Colbert Galleria, Paris

Yup, I have a day lighting version of it with much better lighting of the sculpture, but wanted the blue twilight sky... it's a tradeoff. Benh 18:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • My friend who was with me when I took this picture, asked me the same :). I wanted something not too boring, so I tried to break the symmetry. Maybe I shouldn't have... We'll see what people over here think. :) Benh 18:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support Very good work, was that friend Sanchezn again? :) How does it feel to be in Meet Our Photographers btw? (told you so [3], I should get some credit for my prediction, maybe a 'finding new talents' barnstar or something like that :-)) ) Freedom to share 20:55, 4 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes I remember now :). I feel proud (just a bit ashamed to have added myself to the gallery !) and showed the page to some of my friends and colleagues at work :D. I wonder if it's really justified (since I see no mdf, no diliff etc. in there). This time, my friend wasn't sanchezn. Benh 07:23, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I feel the same way, Benh! Its something to be proud of but at the same time, I'm not the kind of person who likes to show off.. I think my gallery on the English wikipedia is already enough! ;-) But maybe so I don't appear rude, I'll have to add myself to it too. Diliff 17:11, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
16 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:59, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Ephemeroptera on Equisetum arvense.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description

  •  Info created , uploaded & nominated by -- Richard Bartz 19:36, 5 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info A female subimago Mayfly (Rhithrogena germanica), Eaton, family Heptageniidae and in Germany called "Märzbräune / en:March Brown". In her short life she took her precious time to rest for a while on a Field Horsetail (Equisetum arvense), which is a very poisenous plant (can kill a horse without the slightest effort!). It was amazing to watch her closely.
Sorry, but it is not a very poisonous plant ... --B.navez 03:07, 6 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
22 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:45, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Asian-small-clawed-otter.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small --Richard Bartz 23:17, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
1 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 2nd day) -- Alvesgaspar 07:35, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Zwei Papageien.JPG - not featured

[edit]

Two Macaws

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

--Freedom to share 20:45, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Seattle Bainbridge ferry1 2008-02-24.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Skyline of Seattle 

1 support, 2 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 07:31, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Museum of the Riverina-WCC.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Historic Council Chambers

FPX|too tilted, too obstructed --- Anonymous DissidentTalk 23:03, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment I don't think those are sufficient reasons for FPX. It's only very slightly tilted (probably more perspective than tilt), and I don't see the obstruction. --Dori - Talk 02:00, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 3 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 20:30, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Painted Stork.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A painted stork standing tall at the Ranganthittu Bird Sanctuary, Karnataka, India 

1 support, 2 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 20:31, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Butterfly April 2008-2.jpg

[edit]

Short description Short description Short description

Original - not featured

[edit]

 I withdraw my nomination

Alternative - not featured

[edit]

 I withdraw my nomination

Retouched version (right) - featured

[edit]
5 support, 1 neutral >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 13:46, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pseudobiceros hancockanus.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

5 support, 2 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

 Info -- These votes after the voting period of 9 complete days -- Alvesgaspar 08:47, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pararge aegeria on Fomes fomentarius.jpg - not featured

[edit]
Taking a nice background Taking a nice butterfly The result. A nice composition,
full of the joys of life

Short description

I've read that this fungi is holarctic and can be found in India, Pakistan, too. The dimensions are quite real as the diameter of this fungi is average 15-30cm, and the butterfly is 30-40mm tall - plus i found out that this butterfly lives in german forrests, too thats why his name is Waldbrettspiel. So i would say: No worry :-)) --Richard Bartz 16:40, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, good idea ;-)) --Richard Bartz 19:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(UTC) 

4 support, 3 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:49, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Anse Source d'Argent 3-La Digue.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

 Support Wow. Makes me see how alien the world can be without looking like Mars or showing some sort of alien looking creature. Have not seen rocks quite like that. RTG 10:31, 14 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

3 support, 3 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:50, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Icecreamlicker.jpg - not featured

[edit]

* Support great composition lighting focus, and everything. -- 86.164.88.134 01:05, 8 April 2008 (UTC) Please log in to vote --Richard Bartz 01:49, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Oppose I removed the template out of focus added by Lycaon because it might be offending to the photographer. He is a pro with a pro camera. It was shure his decision to make this image that soft. This is a 16 Megapixel image, consider this when talking about sharpness. Personnaly I don't like this nude picture. --Ikiwaner 18:50, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Out of focus and poorly cropped (how can honest critiques be offending???). Lycaon 22:09, 8 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I just wish someone would just find a good nude image (besides the Himba women :) so we could get it over with. But people just go and find stuff that's not up to standard. Whether they're trolling or just think they there should be more FPs of nudes, either way it's not going to succeed with such images. --Dori - Talk 03:07, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment - This is an irrelevant picture for the Commons project, in my opinion: little value and not good enough image quality. I have nothing against nominating nudes in FPC but I doubt this is a serious nomination. Why is the nominator anonymous? And why is he/she not giving a rationale for his proposal? Please remember it is agreed among reviewers that the only way to remove an FPX tag is to insert a support vote -- Alvesgaspar 12:34, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • {{FPX|of little relevance (value) and poor photographic quality}} -- [[User:Alvesgaspar|Alvesgaspar]] 12:35, 9 April 2008 (UTC)
    Comment Sorry, I have to strike out this template once again. I don't know such thing as little relevance in commons, since commons serves media for every kind of wikimedia projects (for example book about pornography or ice-licking girls). And I can't see poor photographic quality. Alvesgaspar and Lycaon, please just oppose if you think that this is not a featured picture. But this page is for letting the community decide and the template is only to be used for clear guideline violations. --norro 13:06, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Guidelines state that the topic should be in proper focus, which it it isn't, hence my use of the template. Lycaon 13:42, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 7 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:52, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Innsbruck Flusspromenade.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Innsbruck river and alps 

8 support, 7 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:BeeOnFlower2.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

5 support, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:31, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Repit agriculteur.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Le répit de l'agriculteur of Jules-Jean Pendariès in Villeurbanne, France 

1 support, 5 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 07:46, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gull 4908.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A gull portrait 

3 support, 1 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 08:52, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Western gull larus occidentalis.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A gull portrait

Overexposed part I see. --Beyond silence 15:48, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
portrait or passport photo ? --Richard Bartz 17:52, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Considering that passport photos need you to show more than half your face, your jab is rather off mark. --Dori - Talk 18:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Now that I think about it, this might be the first nomination I've seen that's been opposed by the nominator :) --Dori - Talk 
 6 support, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 23:00, 11 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Western gull larus occidentalis 4908.jpg - featured

[edit]

A gull portrait

  • Are you talking about the top? That's not vignetting, it's the shore. I didn't want a squarish composition, so when I increased crop sideways I increased at the top too. --Dori - Talk 01:19, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
8 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Pink and yellow rose.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Large Pink rose growing from a garden

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: of poor photographic quality Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

-- Alvesgaspar 07:43, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Comment I like the rose, especially when I enlarge it so the flower fills the screen. For new photos, I'd suggest taking the shot when the entire flower is in the same kind of light. The bright sunlight has overexposed the tips of the petals. You can cut down on the contrast by holding a white diffusing screen (models that work for a flower are inexpensive) between the sun and the flower, or by photographing on a day when there are high, thin clouds. Next, try to subdue the background. One way to do that is to blur it using a wide-aperture lens such as f/2.8, f/2 or wider, and to move in pretty close (but not so close that the flower looks bad). Or select a flower that's high up, for example, growing in a pot on a balcony. Or choose a view that puts the background a long way away. Another way to subdue the background is to find a background that's getting less light than the flower. Using a telephoto lens gives a narrow angle, so even a small patch of shade can serve as a background. I hope you continue to contribute photos and wish you success in having your best work recognized. Fg2 12:32, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Result >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:44, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Al-Mamlakah Tower.JPG- not featured

[edit]
 Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: overexposed over too great an area, and has a date stamp on it (those are not appropriate for FP candidates). --MichaelMaggs 09:41, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

.

Image:Osteospermum-ecklonis.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Osteospermum ecklonis

 Question Why whole foreground of flower should have been in focus? Center of flower is sharp. --D kuba 16:59, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No, the flower in front should be 100% sharp, not the foreground of the flower. --Richard Bartz 18:15, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2 support, 6 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 10:44, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sea-otter-morro-bay 13.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

13 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 10:46, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Bonzini style table foosman close up.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A close-up on a Bonzini table style foosman. 

1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 10:47, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Inca roads-en.svg - not featured

[edit]

Inca road system

  •  Info created, uploaded and nominated by Manco Capac -- Manco Capac 13:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Manco Capac 13:47, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Nice SVG map, but in my opinion not enough to be featured. Could be much improved by using a more harmonic colourset (in particular water colour, perhaps try tango color palette) and bigger country names. --norro 14:50, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose It's probably because I'm colour blind, but I can't easily see where Peru, Chile or Ecuador change to Pacific Ocean. Samulili 17:09, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the opinions, I will try to improove and come back again. --Manco Capac 08:30, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    •  Comment For next time I suggest you fill a whole rectangle with cartographic information, showing also part of the other countries. Also, the colours should be more discrete and the sea a little less kitschy -- Alvesgaspar 11:20, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • This is a map of the Inca Empire - there are no other countries to show. I like the map as is. The shape is very good to illustrate why the roads are distributed as they are. The colors are fine as well - except the color border with the sea which is not distinct enough. Rmhermen 22:03, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
        • Thanks for all commetns. As Rmhermen says this is a map of Inca Empire Road System and by the time these roads were used there were no Peru, Argentina or Ecuador, Infact the only reason I put these countries on the map is to have a better understandanding. The main focus point on the map should be the roads and the cities they are passing through. But the colors could be improved and ı will try to do so. Regards, --Manco Capac 06:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 10:49, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Messier51 sRGB.jpg, (sRGB version) - featured

[edit]

The Whirlpool Galaxy 

14 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:30, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Messier51.jpg, Alternative - not featured

[edit]

The Whirlpool Galaxy Adobe RGB(1998)

  •  Comment Adobe RGB(1998) version. -- Laitche 12:35, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I actually like the srgb one better, because for some strange reason the thumbnail looks way better/sharper -- Gorgo 13:05, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Only firefox 3 beta can display Adobe RGB (1998) correctly in firefox 2.x and Internet explorer it appears under saturated as they cannot display the full gamut of colors. Movieevery 21:01, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment or Safari on a Mac :) Either way it's bad practice to be putting AdobeRGB images on a majority web media based project. In the end though this image won't really benefit from the extended AdobeRGB gamut anyway, looking at the balance of its palette. Mfield 02:02, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
0 support, 0 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 11:55, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Multicolored-Parrots.JPG - not featured

[edit]

Two multicolored parrots

 BradleyMueller 23:05, 19 April 2008 (UTC) Thanks for the feedback, I wasn't sure how well this would qualify but I thought I'd give it a shot.[reply] 

Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 10:54, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Eristalis April 2008-1.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

 Got the message. A replacement nomination with another beautiful species and lots of WoW has been added above -- Alvesgaspar 14:40, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Castelo de Neuschwanstein castle in sand.JPG - not featured

[edit]

Short description

  • Without the girl you'd have of course absolutely no idea of the castle’s size. --Dontpanic
  • And these pictures are of a very rare subject produced with an expert artistic skill. Look at the leaves at the very top of the sculpture. I have seen many beautiful beaches but have not seen such sculptures. RTG 22:04, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I am new, but this is the section for pictures of interest. The high technical quality section is Commons:Quality images. Both these sculptures are amazing looking work regardless of the photography. RTG 22:42, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image of the boats directly above appears on the main page of quality images as an example of one Commons:Quality images#Objects but is not yet a featured picture. Quality is important but so is the feature. (A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush). No other sandcastle picture on the commons compares to these images. RTG 23:31, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 4 oppose >> not featured (rule ofthe 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 07:31, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:New York City at night HDR.jpg - kept

[edit]
Original version
Edited version - improved sharpness and straightened verticals.
  • But you do see one, don't you? ;) At the first glimpse the change might not seem that big, but if you look at the details (the windows for example) you'll see that the sharpness is improved quite significantly. Besides, the lack of sharpness was the reason of the most negative votes in the first nomination, so now that it's solved... diego_pmc 19:40, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Keep Do you really think that we should delist POTY #2? I opposed this image, but this is an extremely fast change of mind. I personally feel that if we delist a POTY finalist, it means that the FPC process would be incomplete and wrong. If we delisted that, we would admit defeat. And I am not one to do this (except if it is blatant). --Freedom to share 20:04, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • I also thought about that, but thinking that this is only an improved version of the exact same picture that was POTY #2, I don't why the fact that it once was POTY2 makes changing the FP status over to an improved version wrong. Oh, BTW, defeat over what? And since when is improvement defeat? I mean, c'mon, sheesh. Just for the note: this edited version was uploaded after the original became POTY #2. Now, without any intention to offend, this thing about "it was POTY2, it can't be replaced" is really foolish. Again: it is just an improved version of the exact same picture. Let's say a game becomes GOTY - should that mean the devs shouldn't release fixes/improvements for the game?diego_pmc 20:32, 9 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Though it probably has quite few changes to be changed rigt now, I have to say that I can't understand you people. Even if the improvement is not gigantic, it still is a visible improvement, one that was asked for in the original nomination. I really don't see why it would hurt to make the updated version of the file FP. diego_pmc 20:57, 10 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5 keep, 2 delist >> kept -- Alvesgaspar 08:06, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:WTC-Fireman requests 10 more colleages.jpg - replaced

[edit]
Original - unedited.
Edited - removed stains.
  • Check their usage. The edited version is more widely used than the original. You wouldn't solve anything by doing that. Besides this isn't the 1st nor the last when the original is supposed to be kept. :) diego_pmc 13:20, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
5 replace,  1 keep >> to be replaced (on top of the original) -- Alvesgaspar 20:36, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Wasp colony.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

16 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 19:52, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Beskid Śląski - Widok w kierunku Ciśca.jpg - featured

[edit]

The Silesian Beskids 

8 support, 4 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sonchus April 2008-2.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

 Alvesgaspar 17:58, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 19:56, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:EPO 2432 wiki.jpg - featured

[edit]

Le Chateau de Maintenon, France 

10 support, 1 neutral, 1 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 19:53, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Chateau de Maintenon.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Edit 1 Edit 2

I would too ;-). If somebody could then correct perspective without altering the colours, everything would be perfect... :). Lycaon 13:48, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Agree, I'am not a architecture specialist but it looks a bit unnatural. --Richard Bartz 16:57, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment added/created another edit, I think the PC looks better in this one, it keeps the right angles in the left tower. Maybe someone can fix it as an alternate? I have to rush off now Mfield 18:10, 13 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
0 support, 2 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 20:25, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Marie-Antoinette, 1775 - Musée Antoine Lécuyer.jpg - featured

[edit]

Queen Marie Antoinette of France, 1775, unknown painter, Musée Antoine Lécuyer, Saint-Quentin 

5 support, 1 oppose >> featured - Alvesgaspar 19:56, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Liedon vanhalinna10.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Panorama of the valley or Aura River, one of the National Landscapes (de, fr) of Finland. Picture is taken from the top of a prehistoric hill fort, en:Old Castle of Lieto. Samulili 10:22, 17 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 19:59, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Colibri-thalassinus-001-edit.jpg - featured

[edit]

Green Violet-ear 

14 support, 0 oppose >> featured and replace existing FP -- Alvesgaspar 08:29, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gamsleitenspitze.jpeg - not featured

[edit]

The Gamsleitenspitze in Obertauern as seen from the west side

  • I understand and thank you for your comments. I took the shot later in the evening (around one hour before sunset) so that the reflections of the snow are not too harsh. I do not, however, take the shadow to be a major problem as it does not in any way interfere with the main subject. Thank you for your feedback, Freedom to share 09:44, 12 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 20:27, 15 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Gamsleitenspitze-edit.jpg - featured

[edit]

The Gamsleitenspitze in Obertauern as seen from the west side 

6 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 18:27, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Piazza San Pietro Panorama from basilica.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Saint Peter's Square, Rome 

1 support, 2 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 07:34, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Piazza San Pietro Panorama from basilica edit.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Saint Peter's Square, Rome 

1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 18:31, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Florisuga fusca 001 1280.jpg- not featured

[edit]

Short description

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: too small. The guideline minimum size is 2Mpx; this is only 1.1Mpx. --MichaelMaggs 05:48, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.

Image:Brno-Medlanky kriz v zameckem parku.jpg- not featured

[edit]

Cross in the chateau park

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: has rather poor lighting (shadows across the subject), has a distracting backgound (fence), and is not a sufficiently strong composition. --MichaelMaggs 05:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed.
[edit]

Crying boy

Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines and is unlikely to succeed for the following reason: requested for deletion. Please renominate if issue is resolved. --norro 10:11, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] Anyone other than the nominator who disagrees may override this template by changing {{FPX}} to {{FPX contested}} and adding a vote in support. Voting will then continue in the usual way. If not contested within 24 hours, this nomination may be closed. 
result: not featured due to licensing issues --norro 09:26, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:PLA tanker 070324-F-0193C-028.JPEG - not featured

[edit]

Chinese tanker (a soldier who drives a tank.) Extreme nose hair detail.

As far as the picture speaking by itself, I have never been to China nor do I know anything about the Chinese military, but the headgear, the stubble, the impassive solemnity and intent attitude masking boredom... this is a soldier doing what has made up a soldier's life for millenia in every nation of the world. It seems to me transcendently expressive, that's why I nominated it. But I should have said so in the first place. Longer description next time... --❨Ṩtruthious ℬandersnatch❩ 08:06, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2 support, 2 neutral, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:51, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Torre de Belém e Padrão dos Descobrimentos in sand.JPG - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

3 support,1 neutral, 3 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:50, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:L'Ametlla de Mar.jpg - not featured

[edit]

L'Ametlla de Mar fishing boats 

6 support, 6oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:49, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Escudo Nueva Esparta.svg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

7 support, 2 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:48, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:DTM Mercedes w204 Schneider amk.jpg - featured

[edit]

Mercedes-Benz DTM car 

16 support, 1 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:47, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:False Color Human Eye.jpg - not featured

[edit]

A false-colored human eye 

2 support, 5 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Spider April 2008-1.jpg

[edit]

Short description Short description Short description

Original (left) - not featured

[edit]
3 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:46, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative (right) - not featured

[edit]

 A more exciting version is being nominated above. Up to Luc Viatour to withdraw his version below - Alvesgaspar 15:27, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 07:29, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Alternative (right 3) - not featured

[edit]
3 support, 0 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:45, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

[edit]
  •  Comment Stick the left hand one and the right hand one together to show that the spider is doing that on purpose..? (far right one better... maybe you could colour match the left and right ones) RTG 19:44, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Oratoire Saint-Joseph du Mont-Royal 3.jpg - featured

[edit]

10 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:44, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Panning Sverre Isachsen Ford Focus T16 4x4.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Drifting race car 

5 support, 5oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Grosser Wollschweber Bombylius major 4.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description

  •  Info created, uploaded & nominated by -- Richard Bartz 14:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info I have a bad habbit. I like to run and gun on everything which is tiny & moving. With this damn guys it doesn't work. They are sowhat nervous and shy ... it costs me 5 days staying motionless on a look-out to get a good shot like this. About this unusual Fly: it's a Bee-fly (Bombylius major), belonging to the family Bombyliidae (the bee-flies). Their behaviour when they collecting pollen is similar to Kolobri birds which makes them very interesting to watch.
  •  Support -- Richard Bartz 14:18, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Question Very nice, but where is it's left wing? --norro 15:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
As i tried to explain this phenomenon in the info text. The behaviour is like a Kolibri bird. The insect is floating. Another example Image:Grosser Wollschweber Bobylius major 5.jpg. If you are interested into this species and want to see more wing-details lets have a look here --Richard Bartz 16:00, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hmmm, so I don't see the left wing because it is moving too fast? I wonder because I can the right wing very clear. --norro 16:33, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4 support, 3 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:43, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:F-22 Raptor .jpg - not featured

[edit]

F-22 Raptor after beeing refueled by an A KC-135 Stratotanker. 

7 support, 8 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 21:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Friendly Fire Iraq.ogg - not featured

[edit]

1 support, 3 oppose >> not featured (rule of the 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:40, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Friendly Fire Iraq (audio).ogg - not featured

[edit]

1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of yhe 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:39, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Populus nigra Italica in the spring.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Poplar "snow"

  •  Info An accidentally pretty sight of Italian black cottonwood letting its seends fly like snowing in the spring. Apart from æsthetitcs the leaves and catkins(sp?) are clearly visible so it's useful for illustrations as well. Created by grin - uploaded by grin - (self)nominated by grin -- grin ✎ 09:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- grin ✎ 09:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Nice idea, I like it, but more depth of field is needed. -- Freedom to share 21:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Interesting! I thought less DOF would've been nicer, but I can see why someone would like to have it otherwise. this one is more like an illustration (and in-focus) but - in my opinion - less pretty. My first try on Featured, I really welcome comments to learn from (apart from the advices in the pages about nominations). Thanks for the input. --grin ✎ 12:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of yhe 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Endormi P1430887.JPG - not featured

[edit]

A chameleon (Furcifer pardalis) from Reunion Island 

1 support, 3 oppose >> not featured (rule of yhe 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Frühlingsstrauß3.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Mixed flowers

Thank you for the comment --Böhringer 20:02, 24 April 2008 (UTC) [reply]
  •  Oppose quite cluttered composition. Only few flowers are actually visible. It is not recongnizable that this is a bouquet of flowers. --AngMoKio 18:51, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose I know what a Fruehlingsstrauss is, but if I didn't, this photo would not illustrate it to me, which imo is the concept and idea behind an FP/ Would be more effective imho if the whole thing was shown. --Freedom to share 21:55, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 3 oppose >> not featured (rule of yhe 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Short description

 of this version because the other version below is getting much more support :) -- Chmehl 20:20, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

result: withdrawn -> not featured --norro 19:37, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Populus nigra Italica in the spring.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Poplar "snow"

  •  Info An accidentally pretty sight of Italian black cottonwood letting its seends fly like snowing in the spring. Apart from æsthetitcs the leaves and catkins(sp?) are clearly visible so it's useful for illustrations as well. Created by grin - uploaded by grin - (self)nominated by grin -- grin ✎ 09:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- grin ✎ 09:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Oppose Nice idea, I like it, but more depth of field is needed. -- Freedom to share 21:40, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
     Comment Interesting! I thought less DOF would've been nicer, but I can see why someone would like to have it otherwise. this one is more like an illustration (and in-focus) but - in my opinion - less pretty. My first try on Featured, I really welcome comments to learn from (apart from the advices in the pages about nominations). Thanks for the input. --grin ✎ 12:28, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
1 support, 1 oppose >> not featured (rule of yhe 5th day) -- Alvesgaspar 21:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

BMW Sauber F1.06 at BMW Welt, Munich

 Massimiliano 21:52, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply] 

result: withdrawn -> not featured --norro 19:38, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Los angeles mountains to ocean pano.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Los Angeles, California - a panorama from mountains to ocean

It's 8000 wide, over 5 MP. yes it's much smaller than the 222 MP original, but until there's a non commercial CC license option on Commons, this is as big as it gets. This will still print 53"x4" at 150 dpi. Mfield 19:52, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
7 support, 6 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 23:33, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Sunset mirage 7134.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Sunset

FPX|Low quality and no value image --Mbz1 19:14, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Support Certainly has some value imo. Did you use an MF lens (because the aperture and focal length are not shown)? --Freedom to share 19:38, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Agree -- Alvesgaspar 20:49, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  CommentThank you for your support, but this image has a very little interest for the general public indeed. I've nominated much more interesting sunset mirage and green flash images before and none has passed. This particular image was very interesting to me because it shows a w:mirage of a w:sunspot, but it is hard to see and hard to explain. I took a much better image of a very rare sunspot mirage, if you scroll down the page, but that one also would have never passed FP nomination. I guess I've alvays believed in mirages and probably way too much. (The image was taken with a bad MF 5000 mm mirror lense. It works for me, when I take images of sunset mirages, but the quality is not so good for FP.)Thank you.--Mbz1 21:17, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  OpposeThis is an interesting, rare and special image, but it is definitely neither FP quality nor FP value.--Mbz1 21:59, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
2 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:09, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Grosser Wollschweber Bombylius major 2.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Bombylius major

Because the fly is hovering like a Kolibri bird and you see a fast wing beat in 1/500s. If you look closer the feets arent strained, they are used for a balancing purpose. --Richard Bartz 00:48, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
4 support, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:10, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Cello study.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description

Canon EFS 17-55 IS. --MichaelMaggs 18:23, 19 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
13 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:11, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:trumpetcallsa.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

5 support, 3 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:12, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Monument Valley Sunset MC.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

7 support, 5 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 23:00, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Hoverfly April 2008-1.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

10 support, 0 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:28, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Spider and fly April 2008-6.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Short description 

4 support, 2 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Tulipa (2).JPG - not featured

[edit]

Tulipa-flower

The quality criteria are more stringent here. --MichaelMaggs 05:52, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, that is the "Quality image" is not to have the high quality? --D kuba 20:58, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
"Quality images" need good technical quality, but "Featured Pictures" need exceptional technical quality. --MichaelMaggs 06:08, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
3 support, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:30, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Grand Canyon Horse Shoe Bend MC.jpg - featured

[edit]

Short description 

14 support, 1 oppose >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 11:44, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Inca road system map-en.svg - not featured

[edit]

Inca Road System Map

  •  Info created, uploaded and nominated by Manco Capac -- Manco Capac 12:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support -- Manco Capac 12:24, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support--Umnik 16:49, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Support-- Good work. --Dsmurat 15:02, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Strong oppose graphically I don't think this map is one of the best historical maps we have in commons, this yellow is realy agressive, the paths of the lines are not always regular (see for exemple the coast line) but my strong opposition is not based on graphics aspects, this map is not historicaly correct, that's the problem, we can see that in the maps provided as sources of this creation, that the actuale en:Loreto Region is not included in the Inca empire, but it is on this map and I'm quite sure that there is other amazonian areas that shouldn't be included in this map or at least there should be a gradient showing that Incas had fewer authority in the easterns areas--Kimdime69 22:56, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • First of all thanks for your comments. Please note that this is not the map for Inca Empire borders. The yellow color does not show the Inca Empire and it is just used for indicating the land of South America. It is not complete because it is my artistic way of drwaing wich you may not like. As this is not a map of Inca Empire borders and this is a map for Inca Empire Road System (please check the name of the file for a better understanding) the borders of the modern countries is shown only to give a better understanding of the area and for this reason the en:Loreto Region is the map cause it is in the borders of modern Peru. And Peru is the main modern country which covers most of the lands of Inca Empire. And this map is drawn mainly from this image and this image is exactly taken from image in the book Inca Road System by John Hyslop who is one the best scholars worked on Inca Road System. Therefore, I kindly ask you to show me and other Commonians the wrong parts of the map (with prooves of course) in order to let me correct them. Please do not forget the main reason for voting of the Featured pictures is not not to choose but Choose, so with your helps or other peoples help we can change the pictures and by this way we can gain one more featured picture. But at the end if it is not choosen by the group than we can think that we did our best but unfortunately we did not manage to have one more FP. For the yeloow color, if you can show me an example of a better yellow color that you find less agresive, I will be more than glad to change the yellow color on the map. Thanks for your comments again. --Manco Capac 06:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have softened the yeloow I hope this will not give you an agresive look. --Manco Capac 07:16, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Well I would recomend you to use the #FCF5E3 for the lands or if you want a darker color the #F4E2BA. Then you have to understand that this representation of the lands is really disruptive, if I made the mistake others will make the same so what I would suggest is first to make a normal representation of the lands covering all the lands of South America wich are present in this map, if you desagree with this option to make a regular representation of the area you want to highlight (the area with inca road system), you shoud then draw it on the east as a circular arc but you don't have to follow the borders, eventualy you may add a gradient showing that the influence of inca empire is decreasing on the east, then I have other coments to add, I don't understand why the coast line is so complicated in your work, I would suggest you to use a single line with a #27AAEA colour (but it may depend on the colour you used for the sea), for the borders I would suggest you to use a #787878 colour and to use the system of broken line you can see [[:Image:Kosovo map-fr.svg|there]. Regards--Kimdime69 17:18, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination I withdraw my nomination cause I have re-draw the image by the help of Kimdime69 and I will re-nominate it. I appologize to the supporting votes of this image and I kindly ask them to re-evaluate the new image I will nominate later. Thanks all. --Manco Capac 07:36, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Withdrawn >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 10:17, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:USA 10187 Horseshoe Bend Luca Galuzzi 2007.jpg - not featured

[edit]

Horseshoe bend, Arizona 

6 support, 4 oppose >> not featured -- Alvesgaspar 17:56, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image:Grosser Wollschweber Bombylius major detail.jpg - featured

[edit]

I want to marry a WOLLSCHWEBER

Shure (but we will have a exotic dress code) --Richard Bartz 19:30, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No she asked me 4 LSD. After i gave her some Hofmanns she insisted that i should take some, too. 2 hours later she told me amazing stories you wont belief if i tell you ... :-)) </joke>--Richard Bartz 20:04, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There are many Bombylius major in Japan. -- Laitche 18:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
17 support, 1 neutral >> featured -- Alvesgaspar 22:09, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates/Log/April_2008&oldid=125575630"