Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:FPCD)
Jump to: navigation, search
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words," the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.

Promoting an image

If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.

The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.

If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.

Delisting an image

A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.

For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.

  • Note that delisting an image does not mean deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).
Shortcuts:

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.


Step 3:
Transclude and link

Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list (direct link).

How to comment for Candidate Images

  • Write Support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
  • Write Oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
  • You can weak support or weak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
  • If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write Speedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at full size (high-resolution) in an image editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed at thumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.

How to comment for Delist Images

  • Write Keep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
  • Write Delist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
  • Write Delist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
  • You can weak keep, weak delist or weak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
Please remember to be civil, not to bite the newbies and to comment on the image, not the person.

You may find the glossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using {{FPCgloss}}.

Editing candidates

If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do not overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

Gray contrast test image.svg
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Highlight test image.svg
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Colortest.png
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background.
Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.

Contents


To see recent changes, purge the page cache.


FPCs needing feedback
view · edit
Finnish Bofors.jpg Finnish Bofors crew
Berlin - Schloss Bellevue2.jpg Bellevue Palace



Current nominations[edit]

Darwan Sing[h] Negi[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2015 at 20:45:24 (UTC)

OriginalDarwan Sing[h] Negi, recipient of a Victoria Cross in World War I for his heroic actions in capturing trenches from the Germans while injured, rushing forwards where caution would encourage one to hold back.
Reason
A high-quality scan of what I presume is some sort of photogravure-like reproduction of an image for the Illustrated War News. While not great for identifying his face, I think a candid action shot of a Victoria Cross winner being taken for treatment is still highly encyclopedic. Also, I think that there's a tendency to sanitize war; these sorts of candid images do a lot against that.
As for whether a higher-resolution copy is available: I showed this to a friend who is part of a group actively researching Darwan Sing[h] Negi (the World War I era spelling and modern transliterations vary), and she said she hadn't seen it before. Indeed, most of the images in the Illustrated War News, outside of the occasional formal portrait of nobility, seem to be very obscure. I'm sure we'll be seeing more. If nothing else, it almost seems my duty to. The number of poorly-illustrated events and personages that I can use it to help with...
This was scanned at 600 dpi, and has the expected graininess that will produce.
Articles in which this image appears
Darwan Singh Negi
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Military. I suppose you could go with Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War I if you consider it more of an "action shot" featuring Negi.
Creator
L.N.C., restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk) 20:45, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Very useful. Dare I say that the book came in? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:41, 28 December 2014 (UTC)




PlayStation 4[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2015 at 16:11:57 (UTC)

Original – The PlayStation 4 (PS4) gaming console made by Sony. Released on 11-15-2013 in North America it is an eighth generation system and competes with the Microsoft Xbox One and the Nintendo Wii U. This console is shown with the DualShock 4 controller that is included with the system.
Reason
High quality image of a video game console. The previous nomination failed because the author wasn't pleased with it yet, but it appears that the image has stabilized.
Articles in which this image appears
PlayStation 4 +8
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Engineering and technology/Electronics
Creator
Evan Amos
  • Support as nominator –  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment The controller obviously clutters the view somewhat, but otherwise nice. Could be retaken with a clear view. Brandmeistertalk 20:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support; while I couldn't care less about the PS4 besides the neat indie titles shown off last E3, the image appears to suitably represent the product. Certainly is a giant image. Tezero (talk) 01:37, 29 December 2014 (UTC)




United States Capitol at dusk[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2015 at 15:04:23 (UTC)

Original – The eastern face of the United States Capitol in Washington, D.C.
Reason
Excellent capture of a highly recognizable building. The image is a Featured Picture on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
United States Capitol
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Martin Falbisoner




Neil Gaiman[edit]

Voting period ends on 10 Jan 2015 at 10:29:28 (UTC)

OriginalNeil Gaiman is an English author of fantasy, horror and science fiction. Over his career, he has written short stories, novels, comic books, graphic novels, films and television episodes, with particularly well-known works including the comic book series The Sandman and novels Stardust, American Gods and Coraline.
Reason
An excellent photograph of one of the most important living English authors- I've no doubt that there are going to be a number of Gaiman's fans among the FPC regulars who will be as excited as me to see this here. (If this counts for anything, Mr. Gaiman specifically contacted Kyle Cassidy, the photographer, because he was unhappy with the previous portrait on his article.)
Articles in which this image appears
Neil Gaiman (though I am sure it will filter into others).
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator
Kyle Cassidy
  • Support as nominatorJ Milburn (talk) 10:29, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Very useful. I'd have probably reduced the highlights a little bit (at full size they seem a bit overly bright) but then again I'm not getting paid to take portraits. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)




Quince Blossom[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2015 at 21:45:56 (UTC)

Original - Quince Blossom
Reason
It has a high quality and shows clearly the magnificent beauty of a quince blossom.
Articles in which this image appears
fa:به, Flower bud, Flower, Pink
FP category for this image
link to category (listed on the WP:FP page) that best describes the image
Creator
the creator of the image, where possible using the format Diako1971
  • Support as nominator Diako «  Talk » 21:45, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose per my vote at the Commons FPC for this image. Daniel Case (talk) 22:33, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose, suggest speedy close. Not in use on the English Wikipedia. J Milburn (talk) 22:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
@J Milburn I used it in the article Flower. Diako «  Talk » 08:36, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: It is beautiful and I could certainly use that picture somewhere - but only if the time mark is removed, with that mark 02/04/2013 18:35 - it is not so useful. We never use images with time marks logos or signature on if other better is available. You can notice the discussion Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Finnish Bofors crew, ... same problem there. Hafspajen (talk) 03:11, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
@User:Hafspajen I removed the watermark. Diako «  Talk » 08:08, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose DOF and the overexposed part of the image are insufficient. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 09:02, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: And we are using it already, in Flower bud. I am not sure if this negative opinion circle can be stopped by now, they tend to go like an avalanche, but anyway thanks for nominating it and contributing with a fine picture that now can be added to more articles. Salaam. Hafspajen (talk) 10:05, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • And also thank you for nominating an image for Featured Picture status! If you would like to nominate another image, please do so and don't let you be put of by your first experience. Hafspajen (talk) 10:17, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
@Hafspajen Hej. Thank you for your nice comments. This is the link of the pictures, uploaded by me. I've taken most of them myself. Some of them have watermarks. If you like, you can use them in articles. Some of them have watermarks. I f you want to use a watermarked one in an article, tell me so that I remove the watermark. Diako «  Talk » 11:27, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
Responded on your talk. Hafspajen (talk) 12:06, 28 December 2014 (UTC)




Sailing Yacht "Zapata II"[edit]

Voting period ends on 9 Jan 2015 at 17:59:54 (UTC)

Original – Wonderful shot of a classic sailing yacht "Zapata II". A classic racing yacht, Zapata II is a Calkins 50 that was first built in 1964, she is still raced today and located in Newport Beach, CA.
Reason
Great EV, wonderful photo that is clear and well framed
Articles in which this image appears
Yacht - Sailing yacht - Ketch - Yacht racing - Newport Beach, California
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water
Creator
WPPilot
  • Support as nominatortalk→ WPPilot  17:59, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • support high quallity and clear picture. -  Diako «  Talk » 23:25, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - Beautiful photo, but I'm not too sure of the EV here. We already have File:Cabo San Lucas Race Start 2013 photo D Ramey Logan.jpg for yacht racing and Newport Beach, and it works better in both those articles. If there was an article on the boat class or whatever, this would give enough EV for me to support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:46, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Support - Much better now. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 17:57, 28 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support -Hafspajen (talk) 22:32, 28 December 2014 (UTC)




Self-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2015 at 14:36:08 (UTC)

OriginalSelf-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting. Artemisia Gentileschi, 1638-39. 96.5 by 73.7 centimetres (38.0 in × 29.0 in)
Reason
We don't have nearly enough works by women artists. Here's a particularly interesting one, in which Artemisia Gentileschi depicted herself as the “Allegory of Painting” illustrated by Cesare Ripa.
Articles in which this image appears
Self-Portrait as the Allegory of Painting +4
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Artemisia Gentileschi
  • Support as nominator –  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:36, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support – a most interesting artist depicted in a most interesting way - ah all those sugar-sweet selfportraits... women artist came up with .. ah, oh my. This one is bold and not flattering but interesting. Hafspajen (talk) 02:06, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Interesting indeed, as well as non-conventional pose and angle. Brandmeistertalk 10:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Fascinating story behind this artist; good scan, high EV. SagaciousPhil - Chat 12:32, 28 December 2014 (UTC)




Kuchipudi Performer[edit]

Voting period ends on 8 Jan 2015 at 12:26:46 (UTC)

Original – Kuchipudi Performer
Reason
Good quality, EV, a beautiful representation of the art form.
Articles in which this image appears
Kuchipudi
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
Creator
Augustus Binu
  • Support as nominatorBellus Delphina talk 12:26, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - Perhaps a bit less empty space at the top would work better. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:33, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Support - Very beautiful dress, very beautiful dancer. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:29, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Crop looks better Cris 👍 Like : Bellus Delphina talk 14:33, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - though I would like some more info about the dance and the picture. Hafspajen (talk) 02:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)




Carl Linnaeus[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2015 at 21:46:38 (UTC)

OriginalCarl Linnaeus, an 18th century Swedish biologist, who laid the foundations for the modern biological naming scheme of binomial nomenclature. This painting is from 1775
Reason
A solid portrait painting of a pretty significant person.
Articles in which this image appears
Carl Linnaeus, Species, Sweden
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
Creator
Alexander Roslin
  • Support as nominatorԵրևանցի talk 21:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Very useful. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:18, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Old Linné. The only thing Swedes can be really proud of. Hafspajen (talk) 02:09, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support EV. I love him very much. Alborzagros (talk) 07:30, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Well-shot photo that is helpful in the article on the subject. Jusdafax 04:24, 28 December 2014 (UTC)




Central Park Manhattan Island New York[edit]

Voting period ends on 7 Jan 2015 at 14:32:39 (UTC)

Original – Central Park Manhattan Island New York
Reason
Cristal clear shot of the most famous park in the world, Central Park Manhattan Island New York: Central Park is a challenge to shoot for any photographer. This shot, I felt was indicative of the contrast between nature and societies intrusion upon it.
Articles in which this image appears
Central Park; History of landscape architecture; Frederick Law Olmsted; Landscape architecture.
FP category for this image
Portal:Geography/Featured picture
Creator
talk→ WPPilot  14:32, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
ALT: Central Park Manhattan New York alt 1 (color and brightness corrected + pushed vibrance a touch.
  • Support as nominatortalk→ WPPilot  14:32, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support any – Hope nobody is going to hit me in the head, but yes, I support. Central Park is the beginning of the modern urban planning landscape architecture, modern city planning and a very-very iconic setting. Also like the idea of a winter picture - it shows the structure better - the leafs would cover it otherwise. Leave any complaints here ->9709 - Milano - S. Ambrogio - Tesoro - Pleurants - Foto Giovanni Dall'Orto 25-Apr-2007.jpg. Hafspajen (talk) 18:11, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Dark with a crowded yet uninteresting composition that doesn't really give viewers a feel for the park. I think that this is actually inferior to the (far from great) lead photo the nominator used this image to replace [1]. Nick-D (talk) 04:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment I don't really agree. The previous was a pond and some trees, with a few buildings in the background. This one shows the plan of the setting much better. The biggest problem with the park is that one have pictures that don't show the park's disposition, aesthetic and functional design and location - just bits and parts of it - or one have the plans and working drawings of the architect, - that don't shows the park, - this one is just a perfect balance. As a landscape architect I am very pleased with this picture, find it very useful. This one shows many of the park's elements and their combinations: - the buildings, roads, the untouched natural rocks, the trees, the playgrounds ... and the combination of it including the contrast of private and public open spaces. Hafspajen (talk) 11:45, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose All the buildings are tilted towards the centre (especially at the sides of the picture), and overall picture is too dark... Given the ease of taking this again, I know we can do better... gazhiley 13:04, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment Thought so... Hafspajen (talk) 16:08, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Thought so what? gazhiley 23:40, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
->Hafspajen (talk) 03:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC).. Hafspajen (talk) 02:16, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
What's that supposed to mean? gazhiley 10:07, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • The curves that you see are the result of the lens. If you look at the building the photo was centered upon it is square to the photo. As far as ease of getting this shot again, it was not easy at all, frankly speaking. Central park is busy. I had to wait for a half hour to get a clear shot that had no people or moving objects in it. Once the sun comes out the buildings in the background are washed out and the balance IMHO becomes much less in contrast as the sky is just to bright. talk→ WPPilot  17:02, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. For me, the lighting is pretty dreary and uninteresting. Sorry. 109.153.232.33 (talk) 20:15, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment and for me as a landscape architect it has a giant EV. Absolutely HUGE EV. Hafspajen (talk) 03:28, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose- Dark, tilt, flat color, and (IMO) lacks the EV necessary to represent Central Park. The link for article usage also suggests that it is used in "New York City" which may be in error.--Godot13 (talk) 20:36, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment And I say it does not lacks the EV necessary to represent Central Park. In each and every book about the History of landscape architecture there is a picture of this park. Honestly - with he hand on the Bible - never found any picture in any of these books as informative like this one. Do whatever you want with this information (that would be EV)- or go and start borrowing Landscape architecture books, and you will soon notice it. Hafspajen (talk) 02:16, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Note That is quite flattering, regardless of what the others vote here. I have learned that this board tends to "Sway" so to speak but your comment, from the perspective of a professional is duly noted. Thank you kindly for your comment and your support.talk→ WPPilot  02:44, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment I wish I could find a landscape architect on this Wiki to pull him here and ask. But unfortunately we don't have landscape architect user-boxes only architect ones. Never mind, if it will not be good enough for the FP, try to withdraw permission, put a copyright on it and sell it for any books putting together a Landscape architecture history book. They will most probably be extremely happy to use it. Hafspajen (talk) 03:05, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

That is nice of you to suggest;) but I would rather it be made public and the others here be proven wrong. I am not one to withdraw a submission for criticism in exchange for money. You go right ahead and send it to them, on my behalf and any proceeds can be donated to Wiki foundation, every last dime. Cheers! talk→ WPPilot  03:29, 27 December 2014 (UTC)

BTW: It makes a great desk top background :) talk→ WPPilot  03:57, 27 December 2014 (UTC)




Supranational Post-Soviet Bodies[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2015 at 22:29:18 (UTC)

OriginalEuler diagram showing the relationships between various multinational organisations in the Post-Soviet space.
Reason
I thought it was informative and it lays down the current geopolitical situation of post-USSR states quite well.
Articles in which this image appears
Post-Soviet states, Eurasian Economic Community, Eurasian Economic Union, Collective Security Treaty Organization
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Diagrams
Creator
Aris Katsaris
  • Support as nominatorÉtienne Dolet (talk) 22:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Needs to be made into an interactive graphic, with a nation label popping up when you point to a flag. Without that feature, it's a slightly frustrating image... PS: Happy Holidays to everyone! --Janke | Talk 10:13, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Janke (talk · contribs) It actually is interactive. Check out some of the articles its on. You can click on each one of the flags and cooperative agreements and it will direct you to the corresponding article. I just don't get why that isn't the case on the FP nomination though. Étienne Dolet (talk) 10:19, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
For the clicky version, see Template:Supranational PostSoviet Bodies. J Milburn (talk) 11:49, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment This graph needs to be updated. Armenia will become a member of the Eurasian Union on January 1. On the contrary, Tajikstan is still not a member and it's unknown when it will become one. Furthermore, GUAM is basically a dead union. The last year in the GUAM article is 2007. That's almost 8 years now. --Երևանցի talk 21:51, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Yerevantsi (talk · contribs) Yes, you're right. But that can always be updated. Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:37, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • It would have to be updated before promotion, meaning that this image is unstable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:34, 26 December 2014 (UTC)




Skyline of Detroit[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2015 at 13:26:40 (UTC)

Original – Skyline of Detroit, Michigan, in December 2014
Reason
High quality image of the current skyline of Detroit. Lighting is the best that can be had, shooting north from across the Detroit River (in the summer, the sun comes from the north, and thus the skyline is in shadow).
Articles in which this image appears
Detroit, Detroit International Riverfront
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator
Chris Woodrich
  • Support as nominator –  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:26, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support No issues I can see - good representation of the skyline. gazhiley 13:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Hafspajen (talk) 05:25, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - There is a stitching error at the very top of the image (in the sky, directly above the building labeled 211 between the steamboat and the tall building with the four American flags on top) Tokugawapants (talk) 09:14, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, with comment - So I've never been to Detroit, but I was wondering if the content on the left side of the image (say, to the left of the steamboat) is typically considered part of the "skyline" of Detroit. I understand a lot of work goes into making a panorama, but if I were asked to present/render the "skyline" of Detroit, I (as someone who's never been to Detroit) wouldn't include most of the material to the left of the image. However, looking at the image in the context of the Detroit article, it makes more sense in that context, but there it's presented as the Detroit International Riverfront, which makes more sense to me, since everything in the foreground this image is part of the Detroit International Riverfront, according to the article's definition. So I guess I'd like it more if it were labeled/described as it is in the Detroit article, i.e. as (a segment of) the Detroit International Riverfront. Anyway, this is splitting hairs and I realize my thoughts on skylines are just my personal opinion, but I thought I'd throw it out there. Tokugawapants (talk) 20:26, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
    • The scale might seem a little wonky, but then the Renaissance Center does dominate much of the skyline. Joe Louis Arena (towards the left of the image) is part of downtown Detroit, as is the RC. As for the riverfront article... I think that's a good idea. I'll include the image there. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:18, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support --Alchemist-hp (talk) 04:17, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - nice work.--Godot13 (talk) 04:46, 25 December 2014 (UTC)




Elliðaey (Breiðafjörður)[edit]

Voting period ends on 4 Jan 2015 at 00:05:50 (UTC)

Original – Island Elliðaey in the Iceland bay Breiðafjörður
Detail of image of Elliðaey (Breiðafjörður), Iceland pointing out haloing artifact
Detail of image of Elliðaey (Breiðafjörður), Iceland exaggerating the haloing artifact that is present.
Reason
good quality, nice atmosphere
Articles in which this image appears
Breiðafjörður
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator
Alchemist-hp
  • Support as nominatorAlchemist-hp (talk) 00:05, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Whole island has a halo, and there is a lack of detail at full zoom. Shadow on the front is unfortunate too as loss of detail of the front. gazhiley 10:19, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
    I try to rework it. I think it is easy to eliminate the small halo. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:53, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
      • In view of the new upload, I will change my vote to Weak Support The other points I raised prevent me from a full support... gazhiley 18:36, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. Hmm, I feel completely differently about this. I think the lighting is appealing and visually interesting, and the level of detail quite adequate. All in all a fine picture, I would say. 86.152.161.61 (talk) 14:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Feel free to login/register and support then - anyone can do it. But each to their own opinion. gazhiley 14:39, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Conditional support (is this a thing?) if the halo can be fixed. Otherwise, it's a beautiful picture; personally, I find this amount of shadow aesthetically pleasing. I do see the shadows, but there is still a fair amount of detail in them. I've noticed that people here tend not to like shadows, but the amount of shadow here hardly detracts from a viewer's ability to understand what is being depicted. In fact, the shadows give the subject some depth (figuratively and literally). Tokugawapants (talk) 19:18, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
To satisfy my curiosity, could you explain what is this thing you are calling a "halo"? I don't see anything halo-like. 86.152.161.61 (talk) 01:28, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Gladly! The haloing is present where the top of the island meets the sky. This is a common artifact that occurs, for example, when a dark foreground is lightened in post-processing against a light background. I've uploaded a crop (zoomed to 150%) with red arrows indicating the location of the halo and an edited version that amplifies the existing halo effect by using a single, extreme curves adjustment layer across the entire frame. Tokugawapants (talk) 07:41, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Nice examples - I almost like the "negative" effect version! Very arty... gazhiley 10:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Thanks, I see. I was looking for something much bigger. To be honest, that tiny pixel-level artefact does not spoil the picture at all for me. I do not even notice it in normal viewing. However, I understand that other people may be looking at things from a more technical perspective. 86.152.161.61 (talk) 12:27, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: a new version is uploaded: new processed incl. lens correction. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 12:12, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Hafspajen (talk) 18:18, 25 December 2014 (UTC)




Finnish artillery crew[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2015 at 18:29:50 (UTC)

Original – A group of Finnish soldiers operating a Bofors gun during the Continuation War, Suulajärvi.
Reason
The picture is a high resolution, colour photograph from the Continuation War.
Articles in which this image appears
Bofors
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
Creator
Catlemur
  • Support as nominatorCatlemur (talk) 18:29, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Watermarked.©Geni (talk) 02:11, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
    • There is a non watermarked version I can upload, the resolution is a bit lower though.--Catlemur (talk) 08:11, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Lot of grain. A bit less resolution would be okay. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:10, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Turns out the non watermarked version's resolution is too low for FP.--Catlemur (talk) 15:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: I oppose a watermarked version, but maybe someone would be able to digitally remove the watermark without doing any damage to the picture? J Milburn (talk) 19:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment The sourcing details on the Commons record are currently pretty sparse. It appears that the photo comes from this website, but more details are needed. Nick-D (talk) 08:02, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I included all the info made available by source.I linked source, all that is left is identifying the model of the Bofors.--Catlemur (talk) 16:20, 23 December 2014 (UTC)




Lüner Lake[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2015 at 09:41:14 (UTC)

Original – The Lüner Lake, seen from Mt. Saulakopf (2,517 m) in Austria. Left is Mt. Schafgafall (2,414 m) and right Mt. Seekopf (2.698 m). Behind the lake are Mt. Kanzelköpfe (2,437 m) and Mt. Girenspitze (2,394 m) in Switzerland.
Reason
High quality image of Lüner Lake.
Articles in which this image appears
Lünersee
FP category for this image
Creator
Böhringer
  • Support as nominatorJim Carter 09:41, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — Gorgeous big file. Sca (talk) 14:06, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose The Nom is for the lake, but the lake is cut off by the peak to the left. Taking this picture from on top of that peak would show the full lake. gazhiley 10:32, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, I like how it shows the mountains surrounding the site. The picture gives the names of mountaintops - The Lüner Lake, seen from Mt. Saulakopf (2,517 m) in Austria. Left is Mt. Schafgafall (2,414 m) and right Mt. Seekopf (2.698 m). Behind the lake are Mt. Kanzelköpfe (2,437 m) and Mt. Girenspitze (2,394 m) in Switzerland. The small yellow squares. Hafspajen (talk) 05:35, 23 December 2014 (UTC)




Pont des Arts, Paris[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2015 at 09:41:14 (UTC)

Original – Panorama of Paris, featuring the Pont des Arts (bridge of arts) and just behind, the pont Neuf (new bridge) and the île de la Cité. The institut de France (french institute) stands on the right, at the end of the pont des arts. The towers of Notre-Dame de Paris cathedral can also be seen on the far behind.
Reason
High quality image of panorama of Paris.
Articles in which this image appears
Landmarks in Paris
FP category for this image
Creator
User:Benh
  • Support as nominatorJim Carter 09:41, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak support - I like the idea, and I know it can't be avoided, but I'm having trouble with the serious motion blur on the boat. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose. In addition to what Crisco mentioned, its's a visually stimulating image, but I find the composition quite messy and confusing. Not many of the Parisian landmarks actually seem to be well shown. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 20:03, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Once again, darkness is the devil here : motion blur on the boats (both the the right of the bridge, and the one under the second arch from the right); lack of detail around the banking behind the "700 Pont Au Change" sign; The main bridge itself is too dark to see what it is made from. All minor issues, but all together makes me oppose. Nice enough picture, but the lack of light results in a few issues - would love to see this taken during the day. gazhiley 11:04, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, but then I shamelessly like atmospheric photos. I think it is the light that keeps the composition and everything together, and the details are rather clear, -well, with the exception of the a boat. Here it is Paris Night.jpg the cars who move. Doesn't this has to do with the length of exposure in night pics? Hafspajen (talk) 05:28, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose The cluttered composition (of what's a rather formal and fairly uncluttered cityscape) greatly reduces any EV here. It's a pretty picture, but not much use for illustrating articles IMO. Nick-D (talk) 23:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)




Öxarárfoss[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2015 at 09:41:14 (UTC)

OriginalÖxarárfoss, Suðurland, Islandia
Reason
High quality image of Öxarárfoss.
Articles in which this image appears
Öxarárfoss
FP category for this image
Creator
Diego Delso
  • Support as nominatorJim Carter 09:41, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - One of Diego's better pictures from Iceland. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:30, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — Rugged grandeur, great detail. Sca (talk) 14:12, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Excellent level of detail throughout, other than a slight part out of focus on the right side vertical rock face - nowhere near enough to oppose though. Lovely scene. gazhiley 12:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. It's a shame the article's so short; I managed to find a source for the most basic information, but most of what's online is not in English. J Milburn (talk) 20:10, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, non English sources do fine nowadays. Just put a mark on it like (Portuguese) or so. (Icelandic ...?) Hafspajen (talk) 05:32, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I have no objection to non-English sources in articles, but I can't read them, so they're no good to me! J Milburn (talk) 11:54, 23 December 2014 (UTC).
Yngvadottir reads Icelandic ... rather well... Hafspajen (talk) 15:20, 23 December 2014 (UTC)




Bellevue Palace[edit]

Voting period ends on 3 Jan 2015 at 09:41:14 (UTC)

Original – Berlin: Bellevue Palace
Reason
High quality image of Bellevue Palace, Germany.
Articles in which this image appears
Bellevue Palace (Germany)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
User:Taxiarchos228
  • Support as nominatorJim Carter 09:41, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Beautiful image. Crisp, clear and no issues I can see. gazhiley 13:39, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Slightly bothered by the minute haloing around some of the cone-shaped shrubs on the left, but not enough for me to oppose. Tokugawapants (talk) 23:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Hafspajen (talk) 05:37, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - Is it just me, or is the fence a bit warped? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:24, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Comment - Not just you; It looks like this photo was taken slightly off-center. Notice how the flag pole at the top of the palace sits in front of the rest of the roof behind it. Compare the fence in this picture to Google maps. Tokugawapants (talk) 06:38, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - National Names 2000 (talk) 05:35, 29 December 2014 (UTC)




Portsmouth Cathedral Nave[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2015 at 12:18:26 (UTC)

Original – The nave of Portsmouth Cathedral looking west, in Hampshire, England.
Reason
This is a Very Good Resolution To This Photo But (I HAVE 2 Active Nominations (The Michelle Obama And This Nomination) and 1 Suspended Nomination)
Articles in which this image appears
Portsmouth Cathedral +1
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator
Diliff
  • Support as nominatorNational Names 2000 (talk) 12:18, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Not quite what I'd expect for a picture of a Cathedral, in terms of all the artwork on display etc, but accurate representation of what it would have looked at the time. Nice clean and no issues I can see. gazhiley 13:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Nice photo, but I oppose unless the creator can demonstrate he has permission to publish this photo, a significant portion of which contains art with no-photography signs next to them. Tokugawapants (talk) 23:24, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Good Point - there's a lot of potentially unauthorised art work on display. I've struck my vote until someone can say if this is an issue or not. I will then re-vote accordingly. gazhiley 10:34, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Every single work there is de minimis, which means this is fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:33, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
        • Very well, then once again I will Support... gazhiley 18:39, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Very interesting. I'd have compressed the edges a bit more, but still acceptable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:39, 27 December 2014 (UTC)




Michelle Obama[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2015 at 12:01:29 (UTC)

Original – Official portrait of First Lady Michelle Obama in the Green Room of the White House
Reason
She Has An Lady of The Political Activities
Articles in which this image appears
1964 , Michelle Obama , List of First Ladies of the United States +2
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator
White House (Chuck Kennedy)
  • Support as nominatorNational Names 2000 (talk) 12:01, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:31, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Hafspajen (talk) 06:05, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose — Nothing whatever against Michelle Obama — It's just my inveterate opposition to official photos of political figures as FPs (and she is by extension a political figure). I know others disagree with me on this issue. Sca (talk) 15:21, 23 December 2014 (UTC)
Comment -High EV for one thing - she is the first black First lady in the White house... kinda exciting, still. Even if her strictly personal merits might not be that outstanding. Hafspajen (talk) 07:24, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
I think this is a much more relaxed and candid portrait than we usually see (compare it, for example, with her first official portrait). I think it has EV as a result; there's certain subjects which we might not have quality images of otherwise. One could also argue that there is often a fine line between official images and non-official ones. At what point does a sitting with the express purpose of taking an photograph become official or staged? I think we have to judge the outcome, more than the circumstance. 70.72.190.205 (talk) 06:32, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support as others. Yann (talk) 19:20, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. My only tiny criticism is that the crop seems fractionally too close to her right elbow. If there is more in an original somewhere then it would be good to redo that. 31.51.2.9 (talk) 21:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Jim Carter 12:26, 28 December 2014 (UTC)




Delist: Images of the human skeleton[edit]

Voting period ends on 2 Jan 2015 at 01:19:11 (UTC)

Images of the human skeleton
Images of the human skeleton
Images of the human skeleton
Reason
These images were nominated in 2007 and I don't think they really represent our best material. I thank the nominator for putting the effort into creating them, but I do not think their quality warrants this tag. The images have an odd choice of font and coloured bars, have words that are oddly capitalised, do not use standard anatomical terms and do not use adjective consistently ("Humeral..." vs. "Radius head"). In addition these featured images should be in anatomical position which is an international standard for anatomical images. Lastly, the colour choice is odd, the lines sometimes intersect with text, and the body is oddly proportioned.
Articles this image appears in
File:Human skeleton back en.svg: List of bones of the human skeleton & Outline of human anatomy
File:Human skeleton front en.svg: Human musculoskeletal system, Human skeleton, List of bones of the human skeleton, Outline of human anatomy
File:Human arm bones diagram.svg: Acromion, Arm, Capitulum of the humerus, Clavicle, Coracoid process, Coronoid fossa of the humerus, Greater tubercle, Humerus, Lesser tubercle, Radial fossa, Radial styloid process, Radius (bone), Ulna, Ulnar styloid process
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Human skeleton back.svg (1st and 3rd image), Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Human arm bones diagram.svg (2nd)
Nominator
Tom (LT) (talk)
  • DelistTom (LT) (talk) 01:19, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Delist As above, and agree the body proportion does seem to be off, with arms that long, the skeleton should be taller. Mattximus (talk) 18:34, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
Just for interest, I measured myself. I am 180 cm tall, and my arms, held in the position of the skeleton's, measured from the top of the clavicle to the tip of the middle finger, are 84 cm. This is a ratio of about 0.47, which is the same as that of the skeleton, to my accuracy of measurement. I feel that I have fairly normal body proportions. 217.44.130.43 (talk) 00:06, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
Your ratio is fairly close to the norm depending on your shoulder width. A nice anatomical quirk is that your arm span when arms extended finger tip to finger tip should be roughly your height. It's hard for me to figure out what doesn't look quite right with this skeleton, perhaps the shoulders are too wide compared to the rest of the body? The proportions are definatley off regardless, especially with the thickness of several bones. Mattximus (talk) 14:20, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Keep LadyofHats has produced some of our best freely licensed, de novo biomedical illustrations; I am confident that this is some of our best work, and that calling for its delisting is not productive. She's modified illustrations after consultation in the past, so this should be the first step. We don't have all that many professional illustrators contributing scientific illustrations to Wikipedia, so delist nominations such as this one should be well thought out. Lastly, as the IP contributor has suggested, the body proportions are likely within the range observed in healthy adults. Once we start to argue about averages, we run into the problem, "average of what?", and I don't think we want to go there. It may, however, help your understanding to note that this depicts a female, as stated in the file description. Samsara 17:09, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
There is definitely something odd about this image, have a look on google and you will see that there is certainly some odd proportioning. For example, in this image, the femur is just as thick as the tibia. The cervical vertebrae are very thick. The triangle below the clavicle is very big. The rib cage expands sidewards strangely and does have the normal curvature. The lack of anatomical position means this image is in a naturally varus position. Although I admit I haven't seen many real human skeletons (most are models or drawings), this image doesn't reconcile with the corpus of images I see when researching in order to edit anatomy articles, and with these inconsistencies (whilst minor) I do not think this could be called our "featured" work, and I would not want readers seeing this image and feeling that it is other images which are inconsistent. I agree that addressing the issue a good place to start, Samsara, however I don't think the images as they stand represent best quality. LadyOfHats has made numerous, high quality images some of which I've personally used, and I'm very grateful. These are from 2007 and I hope she doesn't mind if they are delisted while the changes are made. How might we get in touch with Lady of Hats? --Tom (LT) (talk) 22:39, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
If you have a concern about the proportions, the first thing to do would be to leave her messages through appropriate channels (there are at least three available) to ask what reference she used, and make an actual constructive suggestion, which I note this nomination doesn't do other than apparently saying that both sides of the body must be in anatomical position, which frankly I'm not sure I agree with. I think most viewers are aware that bodies are generally symmetrical, to an approximation. Delisting and renomming is, comparatively speaking, a waste of resources when a simple fix might be available, and tbh, changing the font is absolutely something you should be able to do yourself if there is an appropriate guideline that mandates certain choices. Just open the SVG in Inkscape and be done with it. It's a clear case of being bold and doesn't require a whole nomination process as a preamble. Samsara 18:29, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
For better or worse, WP has a process for delisting Featured Images. This image is not suitable as a "featured image". Hence I am using this process to get it delisted. Part of being on this site is expecting uploaded words to undergo scrutiny afrom others, which this picture is receiving. I am certainly not going to invest hours of my time learning these image editing and what note. I have "been bold" and cut straight to the point. As noted above and below it's clear other users share my concerns.--Tom (LT) (talk) 21:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Two do and two don't, at current count. I see that there are things that can be improved, but I still feel a delist nomination for something so salvageable is rather a waste of our resources. And I don't think changing a font in Inkscape would have taken you as long as typing out the above words. YMMV. Samsara 08:37, 24 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: Here are some issues I see with the anterior view image:
    • Cervical vertibrae are too wide.
    • Distal third of the clavicle is too thick.
    • Spacing of the shoulder joints is too wide. (Humeral head seems inferiorly subluxated.)
    • Left thumb is impossibly over-abducted.
    • Knees are in an abnormally vulgus position.
    • Patella seems inferiorly subluxated.
    • Tibia is too thick.
    • Ankles are generally poorly represented.
I can't exactly pinpoint what it is that's wrong with the proportions, but the bones do seem unnaturally thick and the skeleton wide. I quite agree that the non-anatomical positioning makes the diagram seem rather unprofessional. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:48, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
To clarify, support delisting as-is. --Paul_012 (talk) 16:48, 26 December 2014 (UTC)




Canterbury Cathedral Set[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2015 at 14:02:20 (UTC)

Reason
This is a very notable subject - the gothic cathedral of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the 'mother cathedral' of Anglicanism worldwide. These six images show the major architectural aspects of the cathedral. The perpendicular nave, the choir, the rood screen, the stained glass, the Shrine of Thomas Beckett, and the cloisters.
Articles in which this image appears
Canterbury Cathedral
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator
User:Diliff
  • Support as nominatorÐiliff «» (Talk) 14:02, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • WooW. Support. Hafspajen (talk) 14:23, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Holy Cr*p on a Cracker a.k.a. Support Fair Play Ðiliff... Are you on a tour of the Cathedrals of the UK or something?! gazhiley 14:45, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — Fine work as usual — although I'm just a little bit bothered by the lights in the perpendicular nave. Sca (talk) 15:52, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Yeah, that was unfortunate, but I can't really ask them to turn off the lights for me. I could have cropped it to avoid the lights but because of the starbursts from them (it's unavoidable with bright lights pointing at the lens), I'd have to completely lose the framing of the arch and that's a somewhat important part of the perpendicular style of architecture... Ðiliff «» (Talk) 16:05, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
Understood. Sca (talk) 17:01, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Great quality and just a feast to the eyes. Nikhil (talk) 06:05, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Stunning. Money well-spent by Wikimedia UK, though I have always thought it's a travesty that you have to pay to get into churches. (It is, of course, quite reasonable to ask for donations, but the thought that you can't get into a church if you've no coins in your pocket seems a little amiss.) J Milburn (talk) 11:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I'm with you on that. And in addition, some cathedrals charge extra for photography on top of the entry fee - usually about £5-6 which 'buys you the right' to take photos inside. Of course these cathedrals need need funding to remain open, but really? What is so different about someone who wants to take photos as opposed to looking around? Oh well, I guess they decided that they can't easily differentiate between religious visitors and tourists, but a camera firmly identifies you as a tourist. The irony is that in the case of Canterbury Cathedral, I specifically arrived at about 7:30am to attend morning mass so that I would have the whole cathedral to myself (virtually) before it officially opened to the public at 9am, and I managed to avoid the steep £10.50 entry fee in the process. Yes, it was cheeky, but sometimes you have to do what you have to do, and hey, I saved Wikimedia UK some money. ;-) Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:01, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support I love all of this photographers work but the sets are exceptional. Could use some tips. ;-)--Mark Miller (talk) 12:08, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - So Commons has a Diliff nomination club... are we going for that here too? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:04, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support the first one is the best. ///EuroCarGT 00:42, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support as others. Yann (talk) 19:21, 26 December 2014 (UTC)




Merkel-Raute[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2015 at 05:36:19 (UTC)

Original – Angela Merkel, showing her trademark gesture, Merkel-Raute.
Reason
High EV and reasonable quality
Articles in which this image appears
Merkel-Raute, Angela Merkel
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator
Armin Linnartz on Flickr
  • Support as nominatorNikhil (talk) 05:36, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose. It's an interesting subject but the image itself is a bit lacking. The skin tones are not particularly pleasing and the image is not particularly sharp or high resolution. Not a portrait that stands out for me. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I knew the image is a bit lacking, but I felt the high EV was enough to overlook any technical deficiencies. Nikhil (talk) 06:04, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment — Have we had this one before? Looks familiar. Sca (talk) 15:54, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: White balance seems rather off; likely from over-correction of the original. (I also note the removal of the background line.) I didn't know we had an article on Merkel's hand gesture though. Reminds me of the Merkel superglue meme. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:28, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
    • I've been bold and fixed the white balance problem. It serves to fix the blue background and the sickly skin tones, I'm not sure if it's enough for me to support it though. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 20:45, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak support I was leaning oppose considering that the quality wasn't good. But the EV on this is great. I never knew they even had an article on this. Personally, the EV overshadows everything else. Étienne Dolet (talk) 22:34, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Much too cool. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:39, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Still? Are you seeing the older cached version or the current one? I adjusted the WB so that the background was near enough neutral grey, but it does still look slightly cool. I just guessed that the background was not colour tinted and it seemed to work ok. The white shirt underneath the red cardigan looks fairly correct, as does her buttons. Her skin tones are not ideal, but acceptable for me. In any case, I don't think it's going to pass, but wanted to double check you were looking at the right version. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:24, 27 December 2014 (UTC)




Receipt for Federal Reserve Notes (BEP)[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jan 2015 at 04:24:16 (UTC)

ALT – Unedited, un-retouched version.
ALT – Unedited, un-retouched version.
Reason
High quality, high EV
Articles in which this image appears
Receipt
FP category for this image
Currency(?)
Creator
Bureau of Engraving and Printing and the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
From the National Numismatic Collection, National Museum of American History, Smithsonian Institution.
Image by Godot13.
  • Support as nominatorGodot13 (talk) 04:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - This looks like it was edited to give a perfectly flat colour, using the select colour tool. Receipts are monotone, but not this much. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:58, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Check the previous version, before the "bowdlerisation". ;-) Alternative? --Janke | Talk 18:53, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - Crisco 1492 and Janke - unedited version offered as ALT--Godot13 (talk) 20:37, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Still fairly flat, suggesting that the highlights were blown. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:58, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Crisco- I suspected this one would be tricky. I'll give it one more try...--Godot13 (talk) 16:43, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Withdraw or Suspend - This needs to be redone from the original object (in January).--Godot13 (talk) 19:26, 21 December 2014 (UTC)




Male western bluebird Sialia mexicana in winter[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2014 at 18:14:26 (UTC)

Original – A western male bluebird on the Okanagan campus of UBC in Kelowna, BC. Takes a break from winter foraging.
Reason
Its a sharp image that shows the distinguishing characters of this bird well (orange colour on upper back, blue on throat).
Articles in which this image appears
Bluebird
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Blalonde
  • Support as nominatorBlalonde (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. I would support but for one thing. It's quite noisy. Would you mind if I apply some noise reduction to the image? Ðiliff «» (Talk) 21:19, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment. Sure, give it a shot. Blalonde (talk) 18:06, 19 December 2014 (UTC)




Saalfeld Fairy Grottoes[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 Dec 2014 at 11:17:39 (UTC)

Original – The Märchendom in the Saalfeld Fairy Grottoes, a German cave considered the most colorful in the world. (Count the fairies?)
Reason
High quality image of a cave, something we don't have very much of
Articles in which this image appears
Saalfeld Fairy Grottoes
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator
Code
  • Support as nominator –  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:17, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - very good. Leave a needle to them. Hafspajen (talk) 11:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Very nice. I find it a touch overexposed (would have been nicer to have a darker ambience) but cannot fault it otherwise. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 11:26, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — So happens I was there once, in DDR days, and can attest it is indeed a magical sort of place. Sca (talk) 13:35, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - per Diliff.--Godot13 (talk) 04:35, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Excellent quality - only just able to tell that it isn't half an image mirrored gazhiley 09:58, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. J Milburn (talk) 11:47, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support as others. Yann (talk) 19:24, 26 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support, didn't get a chance to do so at Commons. Daniel Case (talk) 22:42, 27 December 2014 (UTC)




Languages of the Caucasus[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2014 at 23:38:38 (UTC)

Original – Map of the ethno-linguistic groups in the Caucasus region
Reason
Came across this map. I thought it was very well done and above all very informative.
Articles in which this image appears
Caucasus, Languages of the Caucasus, Languages of Europe, Peoples of the Caucasus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Diagrams,_drawings,_and_maps/Maps
Creator
Pmx
  • Support as nominatorÉtienne Dolet (talk) 23:38, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Commments. (1) Would it be possible to explain in the legend what the letters, like A, G, D etc. mean when they appear on the map? It is not very clear, at least not to me. Do they represent minority groups within a region? (2) The legend box does not seem to be placed in the most felicitous position, giving the appearance of obscuring map data that "exists underneath". If the data really does exist, could the legend be moved? 109.157.10.232 (talk) 02:53, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
The letters represent pockets of language speaking areas in another majority language area. For example, thought Armenia is largely Armenian speaking (light Green), there are pockets of K's signifying that Kurdish is spoken in that area as well. As for your second question, the map is strictly for the Caucasus, therefore by covering eastern Anatolia wouldn't be so problematic. Étienne Dolet (talk) 04:57, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment — A telling explanation of why ethnic conflicts have plagued this region for so long, but I wonder if the map's crazy-quilt complexity is suitable for a Main Page FP — ?? Sca (talk) 13:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Very good work. Yann (talk) 19:25, 26 December 2014 (UTC)




Monet: The Magpie[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2014 at 20:28:00 (UTC)

OriginalThe Magpie (French title: La Pie): The largest and most widely known of Monet's numerous winter landscapes. (1869).
Reason
The largest and most widely known of Monet's numerous winter landscapes, this painting is noted for its blueish shadows. Monet was a champion of plein air painting, i.e. painting outdoors in the open air. The Magpie is among numerous winter-season paintings presented in the newly created Winter landscapes in Western art.
Articles in which this image appears
The Magpie (Monet), Claude Monet, Winter landscapes in Western art
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Claude Monet
  • Support as nominatorSca (talk) 20:28, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Monet's best known works are ponds with water lilies,Water-Lilies-and-Japanese-Bridge-(1897-1899)-Monet.jpg but he is equally great with snow. Hafspajen (talk) 00:11, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support This was painted before he became famous for what he is famous for... ;-) Very nice indeed. --Janke | Talk 19:48, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support – very nice painting supported by some very informative articles. SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:18, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support ///EuroCarGT 00:43, 21 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support as others. Yann (talk) 19:26, 26 December 2014 (UTC)







The Financial District, Lower Manhattan: New York.[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2014 at 16:30:11 (UTC)

Original – Financial District Lower Manhattan photo D Ramey Logan
Reason
One of my best ever aerial photo's of a truly remarkable place..
Articles in which this image appears
Financial District, Manhattan - Manhattan
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
WPPilot
  • Support as nominatortalk→ WPPilot  16:30, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. It's a good view but the image quality is poor. I'm shocked that ISO 320 is so noisy. And there is a lot of chromatic aberration, particularly on the left side. Was it taken through a window? Ðiliff «» (Talk) 23:40, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
    • It was taken through the open window port in the helicopter. It is not on a gimbal so the small helicopter creates a great deal of vibration, that I as a airplane pilot was not expecting. I have about 50 images from the sequence, I will review to see of others had less vibration clutter. talk→ WPPilot  02:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
      • If there is no glass between your lens and the subject and you're getting that much chromatic aberration then I have to restate what I've mentioned in your previous nominations - I think your lens is faulty. Far too many of your shots are soft, and particularly blurry at the edges, particularly on one side. I don't know if you're always using the same lens or a variety of lenses, but I do recall you saying that you were using a high quality lens when I mentioned this in another nomination. I honestly can't think what else could be causing such poor optical performance. I know that it's a tough environment to shoot in, but it's not just the effect of vibration. Perhaps a lot of consistent vibration over time has damaged the lens in some way? Just a thought. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 11:19, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Don't forget that this is a 24MP APS-C body. I guess this is the AF 20mm 2.8D, which generally doesn't get great ratings (2/5 stars for IQ on photozone), so it might well be normal for that lens. The kit 18-55 does seem at least equally sharp though, so it is a somewhat curious choice. --DXR (talk) 13:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
True, I don't know Nikon equipment very well but it's very poor for a prime lens if that is normal. Perhaps it's time for an equipment upgrade. I don't mean to be rude WPPilot, but if you are a professional photographer, you could surely justify more professional equipment? Personally, I would be disappointed if I had commissioned you to photograph Lower Manhattan and received this image. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:00, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Could you please remove the chromatic aberrations? They are especially prominent on the WTC. I agree with Diliff concerning the noise. Also f/10 seems a bit too much for a DX Sensor with everything very far away. Even f/5.6 should be enough on a decent prime lens, allowing for ISO 100ish. --DXR (talk) 10:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Diliff. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:05, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Really not sharp. Perhaps a faster shutter and lower aperture would improve things overall but the edge sharpness/quality is terrible and shouldn't be on a crop camera using a full-frame prime. -- Colin°Talk 13:44, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per above sorry gazhiley 15:49, 19 December 2014 (UTC)




Avery Fisher Hall[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2014 at 04:37:56 (UTC)

Original – Avery Fisher Hall is a concert hall in New York City's Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts complex on Manhattan's Upper West Side.
Reason
Wonderful image of a spectacular place
Articles in which this image appears
Avery Fisher Hall Lincoln Center for the Performing Arts
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
WPPilot
  • Support as nominatortalk→ WPPilot  04:37, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak Support Really nice looking at thumbnail, but the darkness means there is a significant lack of detail in all but corner of the building in the centre of the picture. gazhiley 09:19, 17 December 2014 (UTC)




William Pitt the Younger[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2014 at 00:45:24 (UTC)

Reason
Good painting of a notable historical personage; lead image in his article
Articles in which this image appears
William Pitt the Younger +4
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator
John Hoppner
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk) 00:45, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support --Hafspajen (talk) 01:16, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - Colours between this image and the source are different. Resolution looks to be different too. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:04, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
Alt? - National Portrait Gallery - Room 20 (on display) - Hafspajen (talk) 05:38, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I can't get their full resolution images. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:07, 18 December 2014 (UTC)




The Plumb-pudding in danger[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2014 at 15:11:07 (UTC)

OriginalThe Plumb-pudding in Danger (1805), showing the world being carved up into spheres of influence between Pitt and Napoleon. Martin Rowson deems it "probably the most famous political cartoon of all time -it has been stolen over and over and over again by cartoonists ever since."
Reason
Interesting and important historical political cartoon. Good quality.
Articles in which this image appears
War of the Third Coalition, James Gillray, +4
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/Others
Creator
James Gillray
  • Support as nominator –  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:11, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment — Most famous? How about this one? (The man on the ground represents Poland.) Sca (talk) 17:25, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Face-grin.svg. Hilarious. Funny! Le Pudding en danger, ou, des états épicuriens prenant un petit souper. Well drawn too. Hafspajen (talk) 19:17, 16 December 2014 (UTC) Sca, why don't you nominate the other one?
Not a free image, apparently. Sca (talk) 21:45, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Always liked Gilray. Could be a little sharper, but... Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:42, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. I hadn't heard of this cartoon prior so I'll take your word for it being the most famous political cartoon of all time. As Adam said, I agree it could be a bit sharper, but the detail is there. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 11:41, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
    • It's a quote, sourced in one of the articles. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:49, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Great political commentary and beautiful imagery! chsh (talk) 20141218151259 — Preceding undated comment added 15:12, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support as others. Yann (talk) 19:30, 26 December 2014 (UTC)





Nominations — to be closed[edit]

Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.

Older nominations requiring additional input from users[edit]

These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.

Closing procedure[edit]

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  3. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the December archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  4. If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.
  5. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

When promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
    • Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
    Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Add the image to:
  3. Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
    The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
  4. Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
  5. Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
  6. If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
  7. Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  8. If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  9. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
  10. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the December archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  11. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.


Delist closing procedure[edit]

Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.

If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  3. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the Archived removal requests. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Retained section of the archive.
  4. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

If consensus is to DELIST, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.
  4. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  5. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the Archived removal requests. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} page to the bottom of the Delisted section of the archive.

If consensus is to REPLACE, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
    • Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
  4. Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
  5. Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.
  6. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  7. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the Archived removal requests. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Replaced section of the archive.



Recently closed nominations[edit]

Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.

Robert Cornelius[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2014 at 09:50:28 (UTC)

Original – Robert Cornelius, first portrait recorded on a photograph in history
Reason
historic, first photo portrait, impressive quality for 1839; not sure if any real restorer can improve on the current version
Articles in which this image appears
History of photography, Robert Cornelius, Self-portrait
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
Creator
self-portrait, Earthsound
  • Support as nominatorNergaal (talk) 09:50, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Full EV and valuable in photography history. Alborzagros (talk) 12:09, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - A picture from 175 years ago that is vital. Short version is that here we have the first "selfie," an undeniably historic image. Jusdafax 20:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Grainy, dust spots, etc... JOKE! Of course it's a Support. Full of EV, and "firsts" can never be retaken. gazhiley 15:53, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Grainy, dust spots, etc... JOKE! Support! - Face-smile.svg Hafspajen (talk) 09:14, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support as others. Yann (talk) 19:32, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Promoted File:RobertCornelius.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:53, 29 December 2014 (UTC)



Tu-160 at the 2013 Moscow Victory Day parade[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2014 at 04:23:31 (UTC)

Original – Ту-160 (Tu-160)
Reason
A high level of detail is present and no obscurity caused by the background.
Articles in which this image appears
Tupolev Tu-160
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Air
Creator
User:VitalyKuzmin
  • Support as nominatorKhazar (talk) 04:23, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Vignetting is distracting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:06, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The crop is also a bit tight, it feels very crowded. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 11:42, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment — Tu 160 notable as world's largest and heaviest combat aircraft and largest supersonic aircraft. But per Diliff, crop is overly tight — plus IMO view of plane's underside doesn't provide best EV. Sca (talk) 14:02, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Ah, I don't know it is a rather smashing image, anyway. And it reminds me of my aeroplanes I used to play with - (toys) Hafspajen (talk) 14:35, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per above - crop and view. gazhiley 15:01, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose Crop. Yann (talk) 19:34, 26 December 2014 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 08:25, 29 December 2014 (UTC)



Vainglory Halcyon Fold[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 29 Dec 2014 at 01:07:23 (UTC)

Original – Apple used the mobile multiplayer online battle arena game Vainglory (Halcyon Fold map pictured) to demonstrate Metal's graphics capabilities at the iPhone 6's September 2014 announcement event.[1]
  1. ^ McWhertor, Michael (September 9, 2014). "This is the game Apple used to show off iPhone 6". Polygon. Vox Media. Archived from the original on September 9, 2014. Retrieved September 9, 2014. 
ALT – (TIF → JPG)
TIF as small thumb
JPG as small thumb
Reason
As said in the caption, Apple selected Vainglory earlier this year to represent the advanced capabilities of the company's new "Metal" graphics API (read: this game is breathtakingly beautiful). Not only is this a high-resolution release from that game and a demonstration of just how stunning Metal's graphics rendering truly is, but the image of this map can be used to visually (simply) explain the otherwise notoriously complex yet popular MOBA video game genre. I expect to see it diagrammed up and used in all sorts of ways. I believe this image meets all FPC and is an amazing asset to the encyclopedia.
Articles in which this image appears
Vainglory (video game), Multiplayer online battle arena, Metal (iOS API), Strategy video game, IOS 8
FP category for this image
Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
Creator
Super Evil Megacorp, solicited and uploaded by user:czar
  • Support as nominatorczar  01:07, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment - This would render in the articles and other thumbnails much better using a JPG. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:35, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492, added JPG alt and left a q on your page about fixing this in software. TIF would seem to be the superior file in all cases but WP's rendering technique. czar  03:38, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
And file size. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Question Thanks for that. Looking at the full size image, I see a bit of a shift in apparent sharpness. Is it meant to look like that? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:13, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
@Crisco 1492, that appears to be all in the thumbnail rendering. (I didn't edit the image, just exported the TIF as JPG within Photoshop, first with "save for web" and second as regular export. Looking at both the TIF and JPG at full res, I only see a difference in the sharpening before the image fully renders. Perhaps this has to do with the image just being super-detailed at high-res (which is part of the point). Perhaps, as you say, the JPGs render better, but at least in this case, the TIF thumbnail does not appear as extreme. I added some smaller thumbnails for rendering comparison—feel free to strike 'em. czar  14:51, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • I was looking at the full size images, both the TIF and the JPG. Do you see the annotation I made on Commons? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:40, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
Ah, didn't see your annotation. I'm thinking that it may just be a foregrounding effect with the shadowing, similar to how the grass towards the bottom middle is sharper in the front. That one might be the most extreme transition, but there are similar fluctuations with the stones to the right of the yellow bush on the left, and right above the middle left turret where the stone transitions to grass. czar  16:43, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Indeed. If it were in a photograph I'd say it was from two stitched images having different focuses, but it's not. Anyways, since that's how the game is rendered, support. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:59, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - as Crisco. Hafspajen (talk) 09:17, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - A fine looking screenshot all around. GamerPro64 04:09, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 01:16, 29 December 2014 (UTC)




Renaissance Center[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Dec 2014 at 12:23:20 (UTC)

OriginalDetroit's Renaissance Center, a group of seven interconnected skyscrapers, as seen from the Windsor waterfront. The central tower of the RenCen, standing at 222 metres (728 ft) in height, is the tallest building in Michigan and the third tallest all-hotel skyscraper in the Western Hemisphere.
Reason
High technical quality, good resolution, clear depiction of the central five towers and their surroundings
Articles in which this image appears
Renaissance Center +1
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Chris Woodrich
  • Support as nominator –  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:23, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Good picture - interesting subject matter too as it is a very modern looking building for 50 years old. gazhiley 13:41, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support --Just look at the reflection on the central building. But is it a stitch of 42 images? Unbelievable!!! --The Herald : here I am 16:26, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Hafspajen (talk) 17:26, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment: Could we please have the appropriate FOP tag, or at least a textual indication of the FOP/copyright issues involved with the building itself? (Happy to support once this has been seen to, though!) J Milburn (talk) 23:00, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Sure, got it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 03:31, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
      • And next time a nude woman in the window, please, there's a good zoom :) Brandmeistertalk 11:40, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
        • <shock> Well, my mother made a similar comment about seeing into the offices (though with less nudity). An effective 160mm will do that, alright. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:05, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
          • Voyeurism has been a hobby of Wikipedians for almost 9 years now. ;-) "I thought you were joking about the folders on the desk until I downloaded the whole image in all its glory". Actually, looking at that image with a fresh pair of eyes, I think the blue sky is a bit overdone. I might upload a new version of it with slightly desaturated sky. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:32, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Looks great, can't find a flaw. Mattximus (talk) 00:33, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - very nicely done!--Godot13 (talk) 02:36, 16 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment There is at least one small stiching error. I have added a note. --DXR (talk) 08:18, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Purely out of curiosity DXR, where have you added the note? And where is the stiching error? gazhiley 09:26, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Fix is uploading. @gazhiley, Commons allows people to tag images to indicate certain points of interest, or to ease further discussion of the image. For instance, my skyline of Detroit has the Renaissance Center, Detroit Princess, and Joe Louis Arena all marked. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:22, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
        • Thanks Crisco 1492, good to know. As this isn't Commons though, where would I find the note that DXR has mentioned? I cannot see anything on either the image page, the thumbnail, the full size picture or the talk page for either the image or the nom. Just curious to see what I missed to help spot them in future. gazhiley 16:10, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
          • On Commons. You'd have to click through (the Commons logo) to see it. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:49, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Tbh, I don't really see a change. But it surely isn't a big deal given the resolution. There also appears to be a frame about three window rows below the top of the reflections that looks quite affected by CA. But that's a bit of nitpicking and I just randomly saw it. Still very nice overall. --DXR (talk) 20:23, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
      • Might have to purge your cache while looking at it at full size. In any case, it was just a pixel's difference. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:10, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
        • I still see the same stitching fault in both versions too... It's not a big problem though, but you said you fixed it. ;-) Ðiliff «» (Talk) 11:56, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
          • Blast, I must have uploaded an older version. Done again. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:23, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
            • Thanks! Very nice now. --DXR (talk) 17:45, 18 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. J Milburn (talk) 14:10, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

Promoted File:Renaissance Center, Detroit, Michigan from S 2014-12-07.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:39, 28 December 2014 (UTC)



The Magdalen Reading[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2014 at 12:35:22 (UTC)

Original – "The Magdalen Reading is one of three surviving fragments of a large mid-15th-century oil on panel altarpiece by the Early Netherlandish painter Rogier van der Weyden. Completed some time between 1435 and 1438, it depicts a young woman identifiable as the Magdalen from the jar of ointment placed in the foreground."
Reason
While we're nominating works of art found on other people's pages, how about this one? Tranquilly beautiful, serene, and the lead image in a featured article.
Articles in which this image appears
The Magdalen Reading +1
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Rogier van der Weyden
  • Support as nominator –  — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:35, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Size?Hafspajen (talk) 13:23, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
    • 62.2 cm × 54.4 cm (24.5 in × 21.4 in). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:57, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. A great artwork. Rogier is one of the great representative of exquisite Nordic style, clean lines, clean colours and this special feeling of peace and harmony. Hafspajen (talk) 19:17, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - not so sure about Nordic, but this is a fine repro. Ceoil (talk) 01:28, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Comment Early Netherlandish Northern Renaissance than. (In Swedish is Nordisk, Nordisk Renässans - Oops, it is not Nordic, that would be Scandinavia. ) Hafspajen (talk) 04:48, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support – Great scan of very nice artwork; high EV supported by a Featured Article, what more could we ask for? SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:57, 19 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Nice pic. Victoria (tk) 16:20, 19 December 2014 (UTC)

Promoted File:The Magdalen Reading - Rogier van der Weyden.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:36, 27 December 2014 (UTC)



The Headless One Throwing his head out...[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 27 Dec 2014 at 12:08:37 (UTC)

OriginalThe Headless Horseman pursuing Ichabod Crane (the protagonist of Irving's The Legend of Sleepy Hollow), a subject of many painters of the 18th & 19th century.
Another painting concerning the guy (Not for voting)
Reason
This Halloween friendly perfect quality high EV picture says it all..
Articles in which this image appears
The Legend of Sleepy Hollow, The Headless Horseman Pursuing Ichabod Crane
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Literary illustrations or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings (probably the latter)
Creator
John Quidor
  • Support as nominatorThe Herald : here I am 12:08, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Only those voters must turn up for voting who really can tolerate such a shot of head (the pumpkin) which had actually killed(?) Ichabod..The Herald : here I am 12:12, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support orig. — Tells the dark story, all right. Nice big file too. Sca (talk) 14:12, 14 December 2014 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:09, 27 December 2014 (UTC)



Flaming June[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2014 at 13:48:26 (UTC)

OriginalFlaming June is a painting by Frederic Leighton, 1st Baron Leighton, produced in 1895. Painted with oil on a 47"×47" square canvas, it is widely considered to be Leighton's magnum opus, showing his classicist nature.
Reason
High quality reproduction of a notable painting, and thus high EV.
Articles in which this image appears
Flaming June (most EV), Frederic Leighton, 1st Baron Leighton, Museo de Arte de Ponce, +4 other
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Frederic Leighton, 1st Baron Leighton
  • Support as nominatorArmbrust The Homunculus 13:48, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support – I couldn't do anything but support this, now could I? [check out my user page!] SagaciousPhil - Chat 13:54, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    AFAIR I found it there. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:31, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support. Very nice, but the pedant in me notices the position of her raised heel and wonders if this is a natural sleeping position. Yes, the left leg is propped up by the other leg, but hmmm. Anyway, doesn't matter, it's clearly notable regardless of how accurate it is! Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:20, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Ah, Dillif, she is just pretending to sleep and she is waiting to be kissed. Face-grin.svgHafspajen (talk) 15:27, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Aha! - we were looking for a bigger file before already to nom this. Gorgeous. Hafspajen (talk) 15:25, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Fantastic Nouveau image--Godot13 (talk) 20:40, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support - Lovely painting. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:01, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support — Diliff is right: She's faking. Typical fem. Face-grin.svg Oink, oink! (Note to Hafs: She's waiting for someone to TRY to kiss her; then there'll be trouble!)
Serene image despite bright colors. The oleander sprig is a nice touch; it also provides a little contrast. Like the way the left foot is draped. Sca (talk) 14:28, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • comment It's being evaluated in commons. [2].Alborzagros (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support An awesome painting. Alborzagros (talk) 12:08, 15 December 2014 (UTC)

Promoted File:Flaming June, by Fredrick Lord Leighton (1830-1896).jpg --Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:20, 26 December 2014 (UTC)



Railroad in Northumberland County, Pennsylvania[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 22:58:44 (UTC)

Original – Railroad in Northumberland County, Pennsylvania
Reason
A recently promoted QI that does a very good job of illustrating a vanishing point in real life (as opposed to being a diagram or a painting).
Articles in which this image appears
Vanishing point, Lewis Township, Northumberland County, Pennsylvania
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Others
Creator
Jakec
  • Support as nominator – --Jakob (talk) 22:58, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Question Is this picture a vanishing point? The tracks don't ever reach a point as the trees obscure the point where they would "meet"... As far as my eyes can see anyways... Or am I misunderstanding this? gazhiley 14:07, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
    • Oppose On the basis of the below conversation, I think we can do better in terms of vanashing points. All you need is a clear horizon and a straight line of whatever you are using to visualise the phenomenon (I would imagine a stretch of rail track accross the Nullabor_Plain would manage this. This picture, however visually appealing, does not. gazhiley 10:01, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose agree with above. It doesn't actually show a vanishing point. it appears to veer right before reaching a point. Mattximus (talk) 16:51, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • @Gazhiley, Mattximus: Isn't a true vanishing point impossible in the physical world? I think this is about as close as one can realistically hope to get. --Jakob (talk) 17:07, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
That was my initial thought too, and of course you are correct that a true point is impossible in the real world. However, it seems to me, when you zoom in to the point of convergence, that this picture is actually a way short of what one could realistically hope for, so I think the objection is valid. 86.152.160.175 (talk) 03:16, 15 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Oppose — Even at this resolution one can see the gap between "converging" tracks. Sca (talk) 17:34, 16 December 2014 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC)



Hydnellum ferrugineum[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Dec 2014 at 17:57:47 (UTC)

OriginalHydnellum ferrugineum, Glières Plateau, Haute-Savoie, France.
Reason
Good quality and high EV
Articles in which this image appears
Hydnellum ferrugineum
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Fungi
Creator
Myrabella
  • Support as nominatorTomer T (talk) 17:57, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Hafspajen (talk) 18:55, 12 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support nice --Ebertakis (talk) 00:53, 13 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Support Jee 15:19, 14 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak support – I like how the image shows the fruit body has "enveloped" leaves and moss during growth, a characteristic feature of this and similar species. Technically, photo is alright, although the stray grass blade in front could have been moved before the shot, and a reflector aimed at the spines would have helped. Sasata (talk) 01:18, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak support - I'd have preferred a bit more DOF, but this is workable. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:31, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Weak support. Bonus points for leading a strong article. J Milburn (talk) 19:27, 23 December 2014 (UTC)

Promoted File:Hydnellum ferrugineum Glieres.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:05, 25 December 2014 (UTC)




Suspended nominations[edit]

This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.

Caravaggio's Francis of Assisi[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Dec 2014 at 20:28:15 (UTC)

Original – The painting shows Saint Francis of Assisi at the moment of receiving the signs of the Stigmata, the wounds left in Christ's body by the Crucifixion.
Reason
The painting was the first of Caravaggio's religious paintings, from 1595. Caravaggio is the art history's enfant terrible, unorthodox, striking, innovative and rebellious. He was involved in fights an scandals, but he was a magnificent painter. He had a very special unmistakable style that was his own, and he influenced generations of painters of the Baroque style like Rubens, Jusepe de Ribera, Bernini, and yes, even Rembrandt.
Articles in which this image appears
Saint Francis of Assisi in Ecstasy (Caravaggio) (own article), Chronology of works by Caravaggio, Wadsworth Atheneum, 1595 in art; more.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Religion and mythology
Creator
Caravaggio
Well, - searched, LACMA, - here is from the New York Times ..?, Art Daily,- Detroit art museum; -all art; - Detroit again,  ; -LACMA again- famous-paintings -wadsworth-atheneum - the net is full with this painting - guess have to ask uploader.[3] [4] Hafspajen (talk) 12:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
Looks like he today, but no answer yet. Hafspajen (talk) 21:29, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
This - is the one, I think. Hafspajen (talk) 21:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Also much less contrast (actually, the colours in that one are much nicer). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:07, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
  • Shall we stop this nomination until clarified? Or shall we try an alternative? Hafspajen (talk) 23:37, 25 November 2014 (UTC)
  • - Well, not much I can do, if he doesn't respond. He was editing on commons since I posted on his talk-page - and must have seen my question - and yet he never responded - and he has an user-box where it is stated he can speak English. Hafspajen (talk) 10:40, 26 November 2014 (UTC)
Apparently it was a friend of the uploader who messed up the source, and I have been promised he will be asked... here. So far - no further response. --Hafspajen (talk) 16:02, 6 December 2014 (UTC)




Assumption of Mary[edit]

Voting period ends on 30 Dec 2014 at 03:13:33 (UTC)

Original – The Assumption of Mary by Titian
Reason
This is How It Like When The Virgin Mary Will go To Heaven
Articles in which this image appears
Pope Pius XII , Assumption of Mary , Assumption of the Virgin Mary in art +12
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Religion and mythology
Creator
Titian
  • Comment WP:FP requires min 1500px X 1500px. Hafspajen (talk) 08:06, 17 December 2014 (UTC)Crisco requires often even more, sigh.

Nomination suspended as nominator from 13:05 UTC 17 December 2014 to 00:00 UTC 28 December 2014 -- Held To Crisco 1492 National Names 2000 (talk) 12:05, 17 December 2014 (UTC)

  • Why, exactly? This should be closed, not suspended, if you're withdrawing. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:48, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
I guess he means Withdraw. Or thinks he gets a better shot? Hafspajen (talk) 16:36, 17 December 2014 (UTC)
  • Armbrust - can you help with this? User maybe doesn't understand how to do this. Hafspajen (talk) 16:54, 17 December 2014 (UTC)