Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates: Difference between revisions

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
move 2 to "Nominations older than 9 days — to be closed" section
Line 34: Line 34:
<!-- ↓ Under this line, please ↓ -->
<!-- ↓ Under this line, please ↓ -->
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Parish Church of Urtijëi}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Parish Church of Urtijëi}}
⚫
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Citroën DS3 WRC}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Grassle, Ghent}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/The Grassle, Ghent}}
<!-- ↑ Above this line, please ↑ -->
<!-- ↑ Above this line, please ↑ -->
Line 64: Line 63:
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.
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.
<!-- ↓ Under this line, please (newest at the top) ↓ -->
<!-- ↓ Under this line, please (newest at the top) ↓ -->
⚫
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Citroën DS3 WRC}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Napoleon Bonaparte as First Consul}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Napoleon Bonaparte as First Consul}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Behnam house.jpg}}
{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Behnam house.jpg}}

Revision as of 00:49, 17 November 2012

This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.
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-thirds majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. 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-thirds majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. 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, except that:If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.

Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. 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?

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.

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.

On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) 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 the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate.

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.
To see recent changes, purge the page cache.

Current nominations

FPCs needing feedback




Water pollution in Lake Maracaibo

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2012 at 20:17:50 (UTC)

Original – Solid waste in Lake Maracaibo.
Reason
After the previous nomination about water pollution in Lake Maracaibo, a new picture was uploaded, which addresses the request for more context in the previous nomination. I think this picture meets the criteria.
Articles in which this image appears
Water pollution, Lake Maracaibo
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator
Wilfredor
  • Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 20:17, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose A decent picture but not particularly striking or unusual (sadly). I disagree with its (current) use as the lead image of the water pollution article, which is almost exclusively about pollution dissolved or suspended in water, rather than "trash" washed up on the shore (it merits one sentence). The picture is also far from the most important in the lake article. -- Colin°Talk 11:18, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppse per Colin - doesn't really show water pollution, more general rubbish with a lake in the background... And doesn't really show enough of the lake to be good EV for the lake... gazhiley 09:05, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • I disagree with the views given here - we have in the past promoted FPs for stub articles. This creates a precedent for situations where as long as the scope is correct, we grant that the image has EV, even if the article needs development. Since nobody has made the case that floating debris does not form part of the water pollution lemma, I don't see how this image can be considered ineligible. Samsara (FA • FP) 10:30, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Well I don't think a photograph of trash on the shore "adds significantly" (per criteria) to an article that is 99% not about trash on the shore. If one had access to a decent photo library, this wouldn't be anyone's shortlist (never mind first choice) to illustrate an article on water pollution. IMO it is only in the lead because the photographer put it there, and because some of the other pictures are weak on a technical level. -- Colin°Talk 10:52, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 19:59, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Fontaine S. Michel, Paris

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2012 at 18:25:38 (UTC)

Original – The fountain of St Michael, Boulevard Saint Michel, Paris. The central figure in the niche was made by Francisque Joseph Duret in 1860.
Reason
Good quality depiction of a very well-known monument in Paris, adding to the articles. Only today I realized that they were so many.
Articles in which this image appears
Archangel Michael in Christian art, Boulevard Saint-Michel, Fontaine Saint-Michel, Francisque Joseph Duret, Saint Michael (Roman Catholic)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Alvesgaspar (talk)

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 18:58, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Anna Netrebko

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2012 at 18:04:18 (UTC)

File:Anna Netrebko as Adina in Donizetti's L'Elisir d'Amore edit.jpg
Quick NR edit
Reason
High resolution and quality, shows the artist in her work setting.
Articles in which this image appears
Anna Netrebko
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
Metropolitan Opera
  • The untenable claim was that "Every noise reduction method [loses fine detail]". I said that was "not completely true, though ones options with a JPG are more limited". Not all noise reduction methods are appropriate for mention in the article Samsara linked. There's also no obligation on me to fix up Wikipedia to "win" an argument. Ok, here are some noise reduction methods that do not lose image detail (or lose apparent detail):
  • Dark-frame subtraction is already mentioned by the article you linked. Many cameras support this automatically for exposures > 1s -- too long for a portrait but not for many other images.
  • "Multiframe noise reduction" which is a Sony camera feature that's been around for several years and is present on probably all of their cameras now. It is also known as "hand-held twilight" which gives a clue that it can cope with a degree of photographer and subject movement. I've no idea if it is present on other brands or is a notable enough feature to warrant mention on WP's image noise article. One can do the same oneself by taking multiple images and aligning them and stacking them with Enfuse. This is a fairly well known technique and I've used both.
  • Related to that is using exposure fusion when compared to the alternative for a HD scene: which is to lift the shadows and recover the lightlights using a tool like Lightroom -- both of which would have increased the noise in the image.
  • There's also the various techniques manufacturers use to reduce the A->D conversion noise in their chips and to detect and remove pattern noise at source. They can also identify bright/dead pixels and mark them for elimination in the raw file.
  • There's the cleverness of the demosaicing algoirithm used by the raw processing software. Different tools vary considerably in their ability to do this well, even before one applies any NR to the image.
  • There's the photographer's technique of exposing to the right which involves over-exposing the image at shooting time and bringing the exposure back down for JPG creation. That is a noise-reduction technique that takes advantage of the linear way brightness is recorded as bits.
  • There's basic photoshop/lightroom technniques of applying a combination of masked sharpening and NR in a selective manner to an image. The hair, hat-band and skirt of the above photograph have very little apparent noise but lots of image detail -- they should be spared when applying NR. Most images have some degree of sharpening and noise reduction applied to them and there's considerable room to improve on simplistic global settings.
"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" -- Colin°Talk 13:18, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Hide inappropriate material.

... Which is a great shame cause she's puuuuurrrrrrrrrrdy... Humana-humana-humana... gazhiley 09:12, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment Since when did FP turn into a teenage male wank fest? Seriously people, there are women who edit this encyclopedia and this nom has taken a creepy turn. Quit it.pschemp | talk 20:07, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I agree that Gazhiley's comment was inappropriate but a single comment does not suggest a "wank fest"--most of the discussion above is about digital noise reduction, which only our most committed image editors wank over. Chick Bowen 22:47, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • How is me finding a woman attractive and commenting on it inappropriate, and akin to a teenage male wank fest?!! This is not the first and won't be the last time that a male editor finds a woman attractive... Jesus guys, lighten up... gazhiley 09:08, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. I don't know if it's just me, but the way her hands are positioned, I'm expecting her to rip open her blouse. —howcheng {chat} 17:52, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 18:57, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Purple Sunbird (Cinnyris asiaticus)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2012 at 14:58:56 (UTC)

Original – Male Purple Sunbird perched on a Moringa oleifera plant in Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India.
Reason
Brings out the details of the bird, including the colors. Meets criteria.
Articles in which this image appears
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purple_Sunbird; http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_birds_of_Tamil_Nadu
FP category for this image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Kallidaimaniac

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 16:19, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Red-vented Bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2012 at 14:36:31 (UTC)

Original – A Red-vented Bulbul (Pycnonotus cafer) perched on the front gate of a house in Tirunelveli, Tamil Nadu, India
Reason
Has good color balance, contrast, no major image-noise. Brings out the details of the bird, and so adds encyclopedic value to the article. Image used in the Wikipedia article on the Red-vented Bulbul. Has a free license. No inappropriate digital manipulation done. Image is of high resolution.
Articles in which this image appears
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red-vented_Bulbul
FP category for this image
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Kallidaimaniac

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 15:33, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Trifolium pratense

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2012 at 15:30:42 (UTC)

Original – Trifolium pratense flower
Alternative
Alt 2 - less saturation on original
Reason
Good EV and high quality
Articles in which this image appears
Trifolium pratense
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
池田正樹

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 15:52, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Sangaste Parish

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2012 at 14:52:52 (UTC)

Original – Sangaste manor main building
Reason
High EV and good quality
Articles in which this image appears
Sangaste Parish, Sangaste, Estonia
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Iifar
Is that a Support or Oppose? Your viewpoint leads me to believe it's an oppose.. But could you clarify the comment on angle? higher up and basement to me are two different things - basements are underground generally...... gazhiley 17:31, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I mean top of basement ("zero level"); corrected to make it more clear. Here the extreme bottom of the building and the courtyard are hidden by the bushes and it seems the photographer is on a sloppy terrain below ground level. My comment is negative, but prefer not to vote; because the subject (architecture photography) is beyond my area of expertise. -- JKadavoor Jee 09:09, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough, thank you for your explaination... I was confuzzled! gazhiley 08:59, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 15:07, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Milton Friedman

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2012 at 19:13:55 (UTC)

Original – Milton Friedman
Reason
Dramatic portrait, high quality. Meets criteria.
Articles in which this image appears
Milton Friedman and others
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator
The Friedman Foundation for Educational Choice

Not Promoted --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:28, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



File:Royal Albert Hall, London - Nov 2012.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2012 at 21:18:11 (UTC)

Original – Royal Albert Hall, as viewed from the Albert Memorial in Kensington Gardens in London, England.
Reason
It's a high resolution and aesthetically pleasing view of the Royal Albert Hall in London. I chose to take it at dusk, as I think the evening lighting makes it look more impressive and it stands out better among its surroundings than during the day. Detail is such that if you look carefully, you can even read the writing on the plaques through the main window, or the billboards outside.
Articles in which this image appears
Royal Albert Hall
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
User:Diliff

Promoted File:Royal Albert Hall, London - Nov 2012.jpg --Julia\talk 15:05, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Centaurus A

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2012 at 19:50:06 (UTC)

Original – The galaxy Centaurus A
Alt 1
Reason
Interesting photo of an unusual galaxy, 2,808 × 2,957 pixels, lead image for the article
Articles in which this image appears
Centaurus A, European Southern Observatory
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
ESO/WFI (Optical); MPIfR/ESO/APEX/A.Weiss et al. (Submillimetre); NASA/CXC/CfA/R.Kraft et al. (X-ray)

Promoted File:ESO Centaurus A LABOCA.jpg --Julia\talk 15:01, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Chambord Castle Northwest facade

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Nov 2012 at 15:52:59 (UTC)

Original – Northwest façade of Chambord castle. Built between 1519 and 1547 by François I, it was heavily extended afterwards by Henri II and Louis XIV to its final shape we know well today. Chambord castle is an example of Renaissance architecture. It is also the largest castle of the Loire valley, measuring 156m long and topping 56m height. A UNESCO world heritage site since 1981.
Reason
Noticed the picture I replaced was already FP. As this one is a far better version, with better lighting and much higher resolution, I propose to promote it here (maybe replacing old one, not sure about the process here). Not most inspiring shot, but fulfills its encyclopedic purposes well IMO.
Articles in which this image appears
Château_de_Chambord
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator
Commons:User:Benh
  • You might be right. But I checked the setting, and I don't think the WB was set to something excessively cool (5900°) and I offset the tint trigger to the red side to remove the green color cast. But as far I as remember I was a bit surprised with how white the building rendered in real because many pictures have too warm (?) WB, and that's how we see it in the end. Maybe someday someone else will confirm. In any way, it will be an easy fix. As for the composition issue... I'll be fine with a cropped alternative, but will leave up to the more acquainted reviewers of en:FPC to decide which one suits best EV purposes. - Blieusong (talk) 22:54, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just read it again and noticed you actually mention warm... time for me to go to sleep. Tough issue to settle. I'll leave it like that because I remember this less well than when I processed it. Until someone confirms. - Blieusong (talk) 22:58, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Same seems to go for anonymous irrelevant comments (Irrelevant here for sure). This picture roughly has 68° of horizontal field of view and uses rectilinear projection (check EXIF, "comment" field). Pretty much what you would get with a standard lens at common focal length. To prove you wrong, this is a same picture taken at 24mm on APSC, in a single shot and with zero postprocessing, excepted for the levels/tones parts. You can see one needn't distort anything to get the results as seen on the FP candidate (and for a good reason, it's from the same point of view). - Blieusong (talk) 20:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See [1]. And I'll thank you not to make snarky comments. I am entitled to an opinion. 86.171.42.231 (talk) 15:05, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
His point was valid though. The image is not 'artificially disorted' and the field of view is not extreme. Everyone is entitled to an opinion, even those who choose to be anonymous, but obviously incorrect ones are entitled to be disputed. In any case, your original comment came across as a bit inflamatory and I don't blame him for responding as he did. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 15:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It's true that my comment was a bit extreme, I apologize for that. But as said, my point is valid (which you didn't denied) and I did not want the claim to mislead other people (which happens). - Blieusong (talk) 15:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Just to muddy the waters a little: there is a degree of twisting distortion on the round towers at the extreme left and right: the horizontals aren't and the verticals are slightly out too. This occurred to a greater extent on the Taj image which did have an extreme horizontal angle of view. I agree that the angle of view here isn't more than the wide-angle setting on a standard zoom, and it appears on the out-of-camera shot Blieusong links. What is going on? Is this the horizontal equivalent of a vertical perspective distortion? The sides and middle of the building aren't precisely the same distance from the viewer yet the rectilinear projection (or standard lens) gives that illusion on our 2D screens. Could it be that this sort of distortion is always present on large architectural subjects, but these little round towers are unforgiving subjects? -- Colin°Talk 16:11, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, there is a small amount of counterclockwise rotation (resulting in horizontal tilt), and a small inwards perspective tilt (undercorrected verticals), but these are just imperfections in the perspective correction rather than distortion caused by an extreme angle of view, and they're not really visible at a regular viewing distance. I can see that the towers appear to be skewed inwards but I wonder if the reason for this is that they're not parallel with the front facade and as a result, the outside visible edge is closer to the viewer than the inside edge (also due to the fact that we're essentially viewing it from an angle and not straight-on). I'm straining my brain to visualise just what this should do to the perspective, and whether it would explain what we're seeing. In any case, I'm not particularly bothered by the 'imperfection' - it's good enough. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 16:53, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I think u r right, seems to be more backward tilt (point of view slightly up). I attribute this to me not using vertical correction as you mentioned. Will fix. Thanks for review. As for distortion, I'd like to insist that projecting 3D space into 2D plan comes with properties tradeoffs such as angle, straightness of lines, areas (they are the said distortions) and I could go on but don't know them all. So there are always distortion of some kind, and it depends on how you define them, or how much of them you're willing to accept. We have to be aware of the constraints: you can't expect a square to always remain a square unless it's in a plan parallel to the focal plan, and the projection is linear. The only possible counteract to this is getting farther away from the subject, and we would have ended with something more like the previous FP. The rest is matter of taste. - Blieusong (talk) 18:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment After looking at other pictures and coming back to that one, I decided to increase contrast and saturation a little. Hope you won't mind. - Blieusong (talk) 20:50, 14 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Well... after Colin and Diliff's reviews I had to fix the backward leaning... Which is done now I believe (for those interested, I messed up with the guidelines. My verticals were good, but my horizontal guide was wrong). I again overwrote, and as a bonus (or not depending on how u look at it) provided a wider framing. Hope this will be a final change. Thanks for the helpful reviews also. - Blieusong (talk) 23:20, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support High EV, good quality, etc. All the changes noted above are improvements IMO. Jujutacular (talk) 02:20, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Chambord Castle Northwest facade.jpg --Julia\talk 18:58, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Moonbeam III

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2012 at 19:04:51 (UTC)

Original – Moonbeam III, a yacht designed by William Fife
Reason
Good quality photo of a yacht designed by William Fife, already featured on Commons
Articles in which this image appears
William Fife
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water
Creator
Ludo29 on Commons
  • Support as nominator --Pine✉ 19:04, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, quite striking and beautiful, good coloration, educational and encyclopedic. — Cirt (talk) 00:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support. Quite an interesting and striking photo, but sharpness is lacking. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:59, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. It's a lovely photograph of a yacht, but I wish there were more information about it in our article(s). Right now, it's only mentioned in passing in William Fife, sharing a bullet point with Moonbeam IV on a list of yachts identified (without specific explanation) as being among Fife's sixteen most notable vessels still sailing. The bullet point briefly mentions that it is a "cruiser handicap rater" without further explanation or supporting references and links. What is the sail plan? Is the ship notable for its design, or its condition, or because it was used to smuggle rum? Is it flying a French flag for a particular event or does it have a French owner? What happened to Moonbeams I and II? Right now this image is being used as part of a gallery down the side of the article. While it is the only color photograph and is arguably the prettiest and most 'dynamic' of the bunch, right now the other images seem to have greater historical and educational significance. TenOfAllTrades(talk) 14:30, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I believe that since the only contemporary photograph of a Fife vessel that's still sailing, and the article is about Fife rather than the ship, the current placement of the image has good EV as a depiction of Fife's work and legacy. Regarding the French flag, if you read the caption on the file page, it says that the photo was taken as the ship participated in the French Fêtes maritimes de Brest 2008 maritime event. --Pine✉ 18:43, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



New Town Hall, Munich

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2012 at 17:47:36 (UTC)

Original – New Town Hall and Marienplatz, Munich (2006)
Edit 1 Reduced distortion on right side
Reason
High EV and good quality
Articles in which this image appears
New Town Hall, Munich, Marienplatz, Munich, Bavaria
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Diliff
Please sign in to add comments gazhiley 10:23, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See [2]. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.171.42.231 (talk) 15:06, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
See raekyt's comment on your same link... That's why I said "Please" rather than "You Must"... gazhiley 10:36, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:30, 22 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Actinidia chinensis

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2012 at 17:40:43 (UTC)

Original – Fruit of Actinidia chinensis on a branch, Austin's Ferry, Tasmania, Australia
Reason
High EV and good quality
Articles in which this image appears
Actinidia chinensis
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Fruits
Creator
JJ Harrison

Promoted File:Actinidia chinensis - Austins Ferry.jpg --Julia\talk 18:48, 23 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Naqsh-e Rustam

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2012 at 14:40:51 (UTC)

Original – Naqsh-e Rustam (Persian: نقش رستم Naqš-e Rostam) also referred to as Necropolis is an archaeological site located about 12 km northwest of Persepolis, in Fars province, Iran. Naqsh-e Rustam lies a few hundred meters from Naqsh-e Rajab.
Reason
High Quality, Nice Framing, Featured Picture in Commons and Persian Wikipedia.
Articles in which this image appears
Naqsh-e Rustam
FP category for this image
Creator
Ggia

Promoted File:20101229 Naqsh e Rostam Shiraz Iran more Panoramic.jpg --Julia\talk 22:10, 20 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Colorada Lake 1

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2012 at 12:47:35 (UTC)

Original – Flamingos in Colorada Lake
Reason
I display here and below two good pictures of Colorada Lake, both of them have high EV and contirbute to the article in a different way. This one, although somewhat soft, is an impressive, eyecatching, photo demonstrating well the different coloration of the lake and its abundance in flamingos, and hence has high EV and good contribution to the article, and to other articles about the area.
Articles in which this image appears
Colorada Lake, Eduardo Avaroa Andean Fauna National Reserve, Salar de Uyuni
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator
User:Lucag

Not Promoted --Jujutacular (talk) 19:59, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Colorada Lake 2

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2012 at 12:54:49 (UTC)

Original – View over the Laguna Colorada, Bolivia.
Reason
I display here and above two good pictures of Colorada Lake, both of them have high EV and contirbute to the article in a different way. This one is a good panorama of great quality, showing well the surroundings of the lake, and also displaying its unique coloration, its fauna (flamingos, although displayed in the other picture in a more obvious way) and flora (Stipa ichu).
Articles in which this image appears
Colorada Lake
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator
Chmehl

Promoted File:Laguna Colorada MC.jpg --Jujutacular (talk) 19:57, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Volucella bombylans

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2012 at 12:37:50 (UTC)

Original – Volucella bombylans var. plumata male
Reason
Good EV and good quality
Articles in which this image appears
Volucella bombylans
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
ComputerHotline

Not Promoted --Jujutacular (talk) 19:56, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Inkscape 0.48.2 SVG screenshots

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2012 at 11:13:33 (UTC)

Original 1 – A vectorized screenshot of Inkscape 0.48.2, running on Windows 7, showing a rectangle, a star, an oval, and some text. The rectangle is selected with the Select tool
Original 2 – This one shows File:Red Gallardo.svg. A part of the front windshield is selected.
Reason
Most screenshots used in Wikipedia articles, even those of freely-licensed software, are in a raster graphics format such as JPEG or PNG, which easily lose quality when zoomed in, and their low resolutions do not meet FP standards, but these screenshots are in the SVG format, and even with a resolution of 3784 * 2424, they can actually be scaled indefinitely without loss of quality (albeit not in articles, where they are converted to PNGs. Scalable versions of the images can be viewed in an SVG-compatible browser, by clicking on the image on the description page). There are two images here, you can support any one of them, or even both. If you have a vector graphics editor such as Inkscape or Adobe Illustrator and you can improve this image, please do so. jfd34 (talk) 11:13, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Articles in which this image appears
Inkscape
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Other
Creator
jfd34 (talk · contribs · count · logs)
  • a) to demonstrate the concept of an SVG. In this case, the subject of the picture - Inkscape - is largely irrelevant. To that extent, the images aren't used to demonstrate SVGs in general.
  • b) to demonstrate Inkscape as a program. This is clearly the sense they are used in in the article. However, in this context the fact they're SVGs is largely irrelevant. That's not to say I'm against SVGs in general – I'm certainly not, I have a couple of promoted FP SVGs, and from the look of it this has taken hours of work. But in so far as this image describes Inkscape, a raster version would work just as well. The fact it scales makes little difference to its usefulness, in this context.
I just don't understand why the Inkscape interface has been painstakingly recreated in SVG format, except for a love of irony. However, it is the image in front of me and it does provide a good example of the Inkscape format. So I'm leaning towards supporting. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 19:27, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
There are many Inkscape screenshots available on Commons here. Most of them are either JPEGs or PNGs (there are a few SVGs, but their data is mostly embedded PNGs, unlike this one). When they are opened in an image viewing program and zoomed in, jagged edges are noticeable particularly on the toolbars. Tracing them into SVGs eliminate all these problems which otherwise cause an image to fail the FP criteria. jfd34 (talk) 08:05, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Inkscape is a program that runs on a computer with a raster display. Therefore, the only correct screenshot is a raster one showing the pixels of the software. This is just a very well executed drawing that looks a lot like Inkscape. I think the real reason we don't have FP screenshots isn't because they are too small, but because there no still in making a screen capture. There's clearly skill on display here, but I think your efforts were misspent. Colin°Talk 20:12, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support I completely disagree with Colin. I think he is not so technical informed (so I mean false criticism). That would be apply generally to all SVG? I like this very. So why is quality here misspent? --Perhelion (talk) 01:02, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Presumably because the artist wasted a great deal of time creating this svg artwork when, really, a png screenshot of Inkscape would be sufficient in being an encyclopedic illustration of the software. He clearly has svg skills, and there are plenty of images on Wikipedia that should be in svg format but aren't if he wants to contribute those skills to Wikipedia; but this isn't a time when it's necessary. It isn't being used to illustrate was .svg is, what it can do, what (when used correctly) its advantages are over png or jpeg. There is no need to illustrate Inkscape in an .svg image just because it can output in that format. And there are also situations when artistic renditions and drawings are suitable (maps and concept vehicles to name two), and when they aren't (like when pressing PRT-SCR will work). Like Colin said, despite how excellently drawn it is (and I do think it is), it just looks a lot like Inkscape, but it isn't Inkscape. Matthewedwards (talk · contribs) 04:31, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is this the output of a clever program that can produce vector screenshots? That would be interesting. Or has someone manually redrawn the screenshot? That would be impressive work and patience for sure, but I don't completely see the point of doing it... 86.128.4.241 (talk) 14:01, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have manually redrawn it. jfd34 (talk) 03:17, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The image is used in the article as examples of the program in use, not as an example of a vectorized version of a raster image (whether or not that was done manually or not does not matter). I argue that this is a misrepresentation of the concept being illustrated due to the fact that there may be some discrepancies from the source and this version (as there was a conversion done, and yes I understand photos are manipulated frequently, but you can argue that photographing an object requires interpretation of light, etc. where a screenshot has a fixed representation outside of resolution and other settings). I also believe that the format of this image reduces the compatibility with many older browsers unnecessarily while adding no additional EV. --Chrismiceli (talk) 23:26, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 16:51, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Nominations older than 9 days — to be closed

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

Parish Church of Urtijëi

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2012 at 10:43:36 (UTC)

Original – Nave of Parish Church of Urtijëi
Reason
High EV and good quality
Articles in which this image appears
Parish Church of Urtijëi
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator
Moroderen

Promoted File:Parish church Urtijei internal view.jpg --Julia\talk 16:46, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



The Graslei, Ghent

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2012 at 19:28:31 (UTC)

Original – The Graslei harbor is one of the most scenic places in Ghent's old city centre
Reason
A good quality picture that conveys nicely the mood of a very popular place in the city of Ghent, including the usually overcast sky of the region
Articles in which this image appears
Ghent
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Urban
Creator
Alvesgaspar (talk)
I agree with you. It's a shame, but the lighting is so flat and dull, for me it really detracts. 86.146.106.216 (talk) 18:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 16:11, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Ghent April 2012-3.jpg --Julia\talk 20:20, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Older nominations requiring additional input from users

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

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Armbrust/closeFPC.js

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. 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.

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}}.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. 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.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the October archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Nominations for delisting

Shortcut

Here you can nominate featured pictures you feel no longer live up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. 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 fourteen 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.

  • 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.

Use the tool below to nominate for delisting.

  • Please use Keep, Delist, or Delist and Replace to summarise your opinion.

Panorama of Château de Chambord, France.

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 28 Nov 2012 at 00:01:52 (UTC)

Panorama of Château de Chambord, France.
Reason
Not in use in the article any more. Superseded by the picture nominated here.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Chambord pano.jpg
Nominator
J Milburn (talk)

Delisted --Julia\talk 19:47, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hooded Plover

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Oct 2012 at 20:29:36 (UTC)

Hooded Plover (Thinornis rubricollis), Bruny Island, Tasmania
Reason
Picture has a "bleached" look-n-feel from overexposure leading to little contrast. Cropping gives off-balance feel to composition.
Articles this image appears in
there are many
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Thinornis rubricollis Bruny Island.jpg
Nominator
Jason Quinn (talk)

Kept --Julia\talk 22:05, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Delist closing procedure

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, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

  1. Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
  2. 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.
  3. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), 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.

If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), 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.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. 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.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the appropriate section of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Recently closed nominations

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.

Citroën DS3 WRC

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2012 at 10:39:22 (UTC)

Original – Citroën DS3 WRC, IAA 2012
Reason
High quality, good EV, impressive shot
Articles in which this image appears
Citroën DS3 WRC
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Land
Creator
Ralf Roletschek

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:49, 17 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Napoleon Bonaparte as First Consul

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2012 at 15:21:31 (UTC)

Original – Napoleon Bonaparte as First Consul, February 1803
Reason
High quality and high EV, FP, quality image, and valued image on Commons
Articles in which this image appears
French Consulate, François Gérard
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
François Gérard

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 08:04, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Heydar zade Home

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2012 at 11:04:49 (UTC)

Original – Haidarzadeh house is a historical mansion situated in Maghsoudieh suburb of Tabriz, Iran, on the south side of Tabriz Municipality building.
Reason
High Quality and Framing- Full of EV.
Articles in which this image appears
Haidarzadeh house
FP category for this image
Creator
the creator of the image, where possible using the format Jacopo188
  • Support as nominator --Alborzagros (talk) 11:04, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose This appears to be a scan of a profesionally printed image, with the "noise" the result of a halftone or similar printing technique. As a result, regardless of image quality, I'd be very reluctant to promote such a picture without an OTRS ticket establishing its licence/ownership. But anyway, the image doesn't stand close scrutiny, especially the bad photoshopping on the floor. Colin°Talk 12:50, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Wow, really noisy, and a peculiar blurred patch through the right side of the floor. Also, I share Colin's skepticism of the origins of this photo. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:02, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Actually, I'm not sure that it's necessarily the noise of a halftone or similar print scan. If you look at previous versions, the earlier high-res one seems to have more sedate noise, more in keeping with high ISO film. That makes a bit more sense, as the EXIF refers to a photo processing machine. Skepticism eased slightly, but still not really of sufficient technical quality. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:07, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose That noise is overwhelming. Dusty777 17:40, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 08:03, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Ardabil Carpet

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2012 at 10:27:47 (UTC)

Original – The Ardabil Carpet is either of a pair of two famous Iranian carpets in the collections of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London and the Los Angeles County Museum of Art.
Reason
High Quality And Full of EV.
Articles in which this image appears
Ardabil Carpet
FP category for this image
Creator
vam.ac.uk
  • Support as nominator --Alborzagros (talk) 10:27, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support This is below our threshold for image size (1,248 × 2,411) however the technical challenges of photographing such an object are considerable. From the exif data, the carpet appears to have been scanned by the V&A -- it would be hard to photograph with a camera. So I think the exclusions to image size apply. The carpet is historically important and the image valuable for the article, so the EV is very high. Colin°Talk 13:08, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • What makes you think an object like this COULDN'T be imaged at massively high gigapixel resolution? It's flat, easy to scaffold to get camera equipment over and can a massive image can be stitched together out of many smaller photographs.. not technically difficult for a museum to pull off, and has likely been done. — raekyt 08:56, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • So, perhaps you want to raise the resolution threshold for artwork to "gigapixel" now? After all, Google Art Project shows it is technically possible. Just because something is theoretically possible, doesn't mean that's going to happen. Colin°Talk 11:32, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • 6 pixels an inch for a work is sufficiently high resolution to represent our best work? You going to drop the bar that low? — raekyt 12:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • I did think twice about this because of the low resolution. But I balanced that disappointment over the fact that this is one of the most important carpets in history and has been imaged flat-on rather than the side-glance that most folk at the V&W will get. It is just a judgement-call. Colin°Talk 12:54, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Tomer T (talk) 13:28, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support High Quality--Mahan (talk) 14:48, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a historical indication and high quality--:)Mahdi talk 15:51, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • SupportHigh quality --Kasir talk 16:16, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Pine✉ 00:16, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support a very precious image of a very precious carpet, indeed! In fact 12:50, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Piling on! Dusty777 17:39, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Great addition to Wikipedia. It would be nice on the main page. -Fjozk (talk) 21:18, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Strange I'm the only person to bring this up.. but a carpet isn't exactly a 2D work, and a photograph of it likely is still copyrightable. The source of this image appears to be the museum in the UK, so copyrighted... Is there any precedent to state that a carpet/tapestry is 2D enough to not generate a copyrightable photograph? — raekyt 08:51, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Secondly the carpet is 34½ feet by 17½ feet ( 10,5 metres x 5,3 metres), this is an absolutely tiny image, just barely squeaking past our current size requirements for such a HUGE object... — raekyt 08:53, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Look at this picture. Its size and position make it impossible for anyone to take a better photograph. We are completely at the mercy of the V&A releasing their scanned image online, at whatever size they are willing to provide. Wrt the 2D aspect, I'm no lawyer and ultimately that's a decision for another forum than FP, but it was scanned by a machine, which suggests a 2D quality and not a creative, copyrightable, work. Colin°Talk 09:07, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • High quality photographs of any artwork at a museum is likely technically impossible for anyone but the museum, your point? And copyright is ENTIRELY within the purview of a FPC nomination, since if it's likely to be deleted anyway, why nominate it? I'm fairly sure that things like this are not 2D works... — raekyt 09:11, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
          • Well, rather than WP:SHOUTing at me, go nominate if for deletion. -- Colin°Talk 11:32, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
            • It was hardly shouting. commons:User_talk:Dcoetzee#Copyright_Question is probably a sufficient answer to the copyright issue. But I'm going to Oppose on size since I'm sure the museum has scaled this image down for the web, and it doesn't meet our size requirements, it's an existing object that can be rephotographed, it's not technically difficult for the museum to do, if they haven't already. About 6 pixels/inch is NOT sufficient resolution for a featured picture of this carpet. I don't see this as being a case where nothing better can be expected which is the only clause to ignore the size requirements. Speedy Close. — raekyt 12:12, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Ardabil Carpet.jpg --Julia\talk 08:01, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Calopteryx virgo

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2012 at 09:10:22 (UTC)

Original – Calopteryx virgo female, taken on a bank of the ru de la Bosse near Bussy-Saint-Martin, France.
Reason
High quality and high EV in displaying the female of the Calopteryx virgo species
Articles in which this image appears
Beautiful Demoiselle
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Sanchezn

Promoted File:ColapteryxVirgo.jpg --Julia\talk 07:54, 16 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Frigiliana

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2012 at 16:28:26 (UTC)

Original – View of Frigiliana, a town in Andalusia, Spain.
Reason
Good quality, high EV and informative panorama for the article Frigiliana
Articles in which this image appears
Frigiliana
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator
Aqwis

Promoted File:FrigilianaPano3.jpg --Julia\talk 18:31, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



File:V&A Museum Foyer, London - Oct 2012.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2012 at 14:52:01 (UTC)

Original – The entrance foyer of the Victoria and Albert Museum, featuring an 11 metre high, blown glass chandelier installed in 2000.
Reason
It's a wide, vertically perspective corrected view of the entrance foyer of the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, the "world's largest museum of decorative arts and design".
Articles in which this image appears
Victoria and Albert Museum
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator
User:Diliff
  • Support as nominator --Ðiliff «» (Talk) 14:52, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, great usage of both contrast and lighting to highlight the unique coloration schema. — Cirt (talk) 23:11, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Suppport Tomer T (talk) 09:00, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment Hmm I'd have to say there are a number of issues that suggest it would be better to wait until camera technology improves.©Geni 12:15, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Could you be more specific? If you're referring to the dynamic range, which I found was the biggest challenge with this photo, then I accept that criticism, but I don't think the only solution is waiting for improvements in camera technology. An exposure blend may help, for example. However, it wouldn't be easy in this photo as it's four segments (2x2) stitched, and taken handheld while leaning a long way over the balcony to avoid the edges from appearing in the frame. I'm not sure that I could hold the camera particularly steady for longer exposures necessary for bracketing, but I could try. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 12:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Colour change on the floor betweeen far left and right. Not sure of that is real. The leftmost arch either has a screen across it that the camera is struggling to render or something strange is going on. The view through the rightmost arch has overexposure issues.©Geni 21:35, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
        • I don't know why you would assume that the colour change between left and right is a camera issue though. The camera wouldn't create such blatant colour shifts across a scene. There are quite different light sources: left side is natural lighting coming in from the entrance, right side is fluorescent, middle is incadescent. The leftmost arch has an array of cables hanging from the roof which is what you're seeing there. Yes, it's a bit noisy and isn't rendered cleanly, but fine lines in dark areas rarely are at the best of times, even at low ISO. As for the view through the rightmost arch, I wouldn't really call it overexposed - it's just reflected light in the gold trim, which is pretty hard to avoid. I don't think there are any truly blown highlights there. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 09:46, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Whatever the technical merits, this is a very formal architectural space and the casual angle it's seen from here fails to convey that. At the very least it should be possible to see some element of symmetry. ProfDEH (talk) 14:06, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • It's not possible to take a photo from a symmetrical angle. The best position would be from a central position in front of the pillars (obviously not realistic). The only other symmetrical position is the middle of the balconies. However, I tried that too and the resulting distortion is very unpleasant - more (IMO) than the lack of symmetry here. In such a small space, to fully capture the entire room while minimising distortion, this view is it unfortunately. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 18:26, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes I know that is the case, but it isn't a reason to support FP. The space is square and I do think the image lacks value if that is not immediately apparent, even to an architect. Actually I rather like the distorted wide angle rejected view, it explains the space very much better. Isn't there a way to reduce the distortion, maybe by not fully correcting the verticals?ProfDEH (talk) 19:34, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I don't believe it's possible to reduce the distortion. Not fully correcting the verticals results in this, which is even worse. Because the angle of view on the vertical is so high, correcting the distortion of the floor dramatically increases the distortion of the roof, not to mention the vertical lines are no longer straight. It's just one of those scenes that you cannot photograph without distortion. All you can do is minimise it by selecting the best available position, which I think I did. You're right though, it's not an argument in favour of featuring it if you don't think the perspective works. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 20:41, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
(I'm not entirely sure this is the right place to discuss this but) the corrected symmetrical version really shows what is going on so well, you can crop it to a portrait format and still get the sense of a square space and the interconnected aisles or whatever they are called. ProfDEH (talk) 19:58, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment I tried "squashing" the alternative to around 2/3 its size and the distortions seemed to disappear. Would it be possible to do so more effectively? --Muhammad(talk) 21:02, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not sure exactly what you mean by squashing it to 2/3 it's size? Do you mean in both dimensions (not sure how that would help), or do you mean just vertical or just horizontal? I tried both to see what you meant, and neither seemed to remove distortions IMO. In any case, because of the nature of the projection used, I don't think linear compression is the answer, any 'fix', if there were to be one, would be a complex non-linear compression. Ðiliff «» (Talk) 00:07, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Fish eye effect is pretty strong along the bottom/left side of the picture. Dusty777 17:36, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Regretful oppose This is a good image which would have required a lot of experience and work to execute. However, I think that the distortions to the foyer are too great for it to be of FP standard; a feature of the V&A's foyer is that it's fairly cramped, and this gives an illusion of space. Nick-D (talk) 22:30, 9 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 18:29, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Calliptamus italicus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2012 at 17:30:21 (UTC)

Original – Female Calliptamus italicus
Reason
Good quality and high EV
Articles in which this image appears
Calliptamus italicus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Kulac

Promoted File:Calliptamus italicus03.jpg --Julia\talk 18:27, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Dormition Cathedral, Moscow (door)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2012 at 00:53:14 (UTC)

Original – The northern door of the Dormition Cathedral in the Kremlin, Moscow (15th century)
Alternative
Reason
High quality and very detailed depiction of a wonderful detail of the Dormition Cathedral. The image was stitched from nine photographs.
Articles in which this image appears
Dormition Cathedral, Moscow
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Alvesgaspar (talk)

Promoted File:Moscow July 2011-3a.jpg --Julia\talk 18:24, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Streisand effect

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2012 at 21:54:35 (UTC)

Original – Streisand Estate, Malibu. N34 00.65. W118 47.24. Image 3850. Mon Sep 23 13:30:47 2002. The image that caused the Streisand effect.
Reason
High EV, superior quality for a 2002 digital image, OTRS ticket from authors, free licensed iconic image, no unnecessary digital manipulation
Articles in which this image appears
Streisand effect
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator
Kenneth & Gabrielle Adelman

Promoted File:Streisand Estate.jpg --Julia\talk 17:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Philaethria dido

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2012 at 16:41:05 (UTC)

Original – A Scarce Bamboo Page (Philaethria dido) seen in the butterfly house on the island of Mainau, Lake Constance, Germany.
Reason
High quality and EV
Articles in which this image appears
Philaethria dido, Philaethria
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Böhringer

Promoted File:Pracht Passionsfalter, Philaethria dido 1.JPG --Julia\talk 08:14, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Catopsilia pyranthe

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2012 at 14:20:50 (UTC)

Original – Catopsilia pyranthe male, Burdwan, West Bengal, India
Reason
Good composition, high EV, quality image
Articles in which this image appears
Catopsilia pyranthe
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
JDP90

Promoted File:Catopsilia pyranthe male, Burdwan, West Bengal, India 14 09 2012.jpg --Julia\talk 19:44, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Suspended nominations

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

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=523416290"