Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by ZeWrestler (talk | contribs) at 19:41, 7 October 2012 (→‎Current nominations: Nominating Holden Observatory). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

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


Holden Observatory

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2012 at 19:40:53 (UTC)

Original – Finished in 1887, the Holden Observatory was creating during the expansion of Syracuse University on the south side of University Place. Named for the donor's son, Charles Demerest Holden, who died in 1883. When the observatory opened, the building had an eight inch Alvin Clark telescope, 3 inch reversible transit, a comet seeker, chronograph and chronometer. The telescope was housed in a tower with a rotating dome. Today Holden Observatory houses the University's State Recorder's office.
Reason
This image meets several points of the FPC criteria. The image is high resolution, has a public domain license, verifiable, has a complete description, and I believe is among Wikipedia's best works. I believe the photo quality has good contrast, accurate exposure and neutral color balance with no artifacts from compression. The is of a building on the National Historic Places list and can be found in 3 Wikipedia articles.
Articles in which this image appears
Syracuse University, Syracuse University – Comstock Tract Buildings, List of Syracuse University buildings
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
ZeWrestler - self nomination

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:49, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Pietà (Michelangelo)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2012 at 04:53:21 (UTC)

Original – Pieta is one of Michelangelo's most famous statues
Reason
High ev as lead image, good quality, also featured on commons and Croatian and Azerbaijani wikipedias
Articles in which this image appears
Pietà (Michelangelo), Pietà, etc.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator
Stanislav Traykov

Promoted File:Michelangelo's Pieta 5450 cropncleaned edit.jpg --Julia\talk 20:34, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Banaue Rice Terraces

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2012 at 10:47:06 (UTC)

Original – A panoramic view the Banaue Rice Terraces in the Philippines
Reason
Large, good image, a stunning image of the natural landscape
Articles in which this image appears
Banaue Rice Terraces, Paddy field, Philippines
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator
Ori~
  • Horizon correction. The steps/levels on the left are pointing up. The ones on the right are opposite. Some perspective correction too. White triangle on top right. This is due to improper tripod set-up or no tripod.
  • Greater depth of field. Could be sharper.
  • Remove the vine. Very distracting.
  • Shorter focal length/wider angle. Would be good to not have the mountain cut off.
Those things aside, it is a good picture with potential and a beautiful landscape.--WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 19:58, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:37, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Space Needle

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2012 at 09:25:01 (UTC)

Original – The Space Needle in 2011
Reason
Good image, has free license, has EV
Articles in which this image appears
April 1962, Space Needle
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Jordon Kalilich
I know. Mine was a poor attempt at continuing your humor. Should have put more effort into it. Sorry. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 20:26, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:37, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Gargoyles of Notre Damne

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2012 at 08:33:03 (UTC)

Original – Picture of several ranks or rows of functional, rain-redirecting gargoyles on the French Gothic Cathedral of Notre Dame (Notre Dame de Paris).
Reason
This image is frackin' awesome; it illustrates gargoyles, rain gutters, Notre Dame, and Gothic architecture all extremely well; it seems to defy the very laws of physics. I've never nominated anything on here before, but according to my knowledge of the non-technical criteria, it is excellent. I do not have the knowledge to evaluate compliance with §1; it is high-resolution (§2); it is singularly excellent (§3); it is licensed under the GFDL (§4); in my personal opinion - this criteria is subjective - it adds significantly to the encyclopedic value of the articles, and those related, mentioned in the first sentence of the nomination; it is "awesome" in the traditional sense, i.e. evoking awe in the viewer (§5); it passes §6; it has a passable description; "Gargoyles of Notre Dame in Paris"; I can't imagine how one would get much more detailed than that, without describing where they are on the building (§7); and, again, I do not have the expertise necessary to evaluate compliance with §8.
Articles in which this image appears
Gargoyles is the one I found it in; it would work in many others (see nom).
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture (although it also is Artwork/Sculpture, Engineering, History, in order of descending importance slash relevance).
Creator
User:Albertus_teolog using the signature "Krzysztof Mizera".

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:37, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



The Great Sphinx of Giza

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2012 at 05:11:27 (UTC)

Original – The Great Sphinx of Giza in Egypt
Reason
Good image, has EV, large
Articles in which this image appears
Giovanni Battista Caviglia, Great Sphinx of Giza, Khufu, ist of statues by height, List of the oldest buildings in the world, Paul Solomon, Sphinx, Statue
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Barcex
Well done! --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 20:35, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose does not meet all criteria:
  1. Is of a high technical standard? Red XN Composition with pyramid in background is distracting. Image is soft.
  2. Is of high resolution? Green tickY
  3. Is among Wikipedia's best work? Not sure
  4. Has a free license? Green tickY
  5. Adds significant encyclopedic value to an article? Green tickY
  6. Is verifiable? Green tickY
  7. Has a descriptive, informative and complete file description? Red XN Could be expanded.
  8. Avoids inappropriate digital manipulation? Green tickY
I think there is room for improvement before this image reaches FP status. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 20:35, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:38, 15 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



STS-1 on the launch pad

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2012 at 12:24:00 (UTC)

Original – STS-1 on the launch pad, 1981
Reason
Has a free license, good image, a good shot of STS-1 on its launch pad in 1981.
Articles in which this image appears
STS-1, Space Shuttle
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
Creator
NASA
  • Support as nominator --Mediran talk|contribs 12:24, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tricky one this... My gut feeling is it's a little close... The whole of the launch pad isn't in view - it's cut off at the bottom corner, and the top of the tower is cut off too... But given the fact that we can never take this picture again, coupled with features showing that we don't normally see from side-on angle (the exhaust gas escape channel thing for one - centre right - as well as the various vehicles present such as the fire engine etc) I am happy enough to Support this image... gazhiley 08:13, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support per gazhiley. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 20:37, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support I think this image should be used in a way that produces more EV. Pine

✉ 00:59, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:05, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Nuremberg Church

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2012 at 08:55:38 (UTC)

Original – West facade of the Nuremberg Frauenkirche, 14th century.
Reason
Excellent details.
Articles in which this image appears
Nuremberg Frauenkirche
FP category for this image
Places/Architecture
Creator
Kolossos
  • Support as nominator --Brandmeistertalk 08:55, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose odd sky and blurry pinnacle. Angle not central. As a Nuremberger I unfortunately don't possess a good camera :|. Regards. --Kürbis (✔) 10:38, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose Blurred above bell section, and the golden orb and final spire over exposed and oddly curved. I higher elevation of viewpoint should remove that issue - given that there are obv other buildings around this church I would like to hope that there is one behind the position that this was taken that would give a better angle for full focus. gazhiley 10:50, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support - the ball at the top is a little out-of-focus, but I wouldn't have realized it without it having been pointed out to me; the picture and subject are great, IMO, but the focus issue distracts from it being "Wikipedia's best work", so it's a weak support only. If there is an analogous process to Good Article/Featured Article (that is, if a picture can be submitted to be peer-reviewed as a "Good picture" as well as a "featured picture"), I'd list it there instead, where it would pass in a heartbeat. St John Chrysostom Δόξατω Θεώ 08:49, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per Kürbis and gazhiley. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 20:38, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:05, 14 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Mr. Bean Mini

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2012 at 08:51:48 (UTC)

Original – Rowan Atkinson on a Mini at Goodwood Circuit in 2009, demonstrating a famous scene from the Mr. Bean series.
Reason
I found it interesting because it is a bit funny and I think readers might also be interested with the image. Also, a good shot of the scene.
Articles in which this image appears
Mr. Bean
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
Creator
Nathan Wong

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:42, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Primavera

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Oct 2012 at 12:35:53 (UTC)

Original – Primavera, also known as Allegory of Spring, is a tempera panel painting by Italian Renaissance artist Sandro Botticelli.
Reason
Has a free license, has EV, is of high resolution, good image of the painting of Sandro Botticelli, Primavera.
Articles in which this image appears
Aby Warburg, Italian Renaissance painting, Italian art, List of works by Sandro Botticelli, Primavera (painting), Sandro Botticelli
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Sandro Botticelli c. 1482 (Apokarteron)

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:21, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Parthenon at night

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2012 at 15:16:05 (UTC)

Original – Parthenon at night
Reason
Good lighting and angle, revealing some interior as well.
Articles in which this image appears
Parthenon
FP category for this image
Places/Architecture
Creator
Andrew Baldwin
Of course it is not, I never said that. I said image should be how it is now. Is the scaffolding part of its present appearance? If it is, then I'll reconsider. But I need to see something more than pictures to tell me it is permanent. Scaffoldings serve no permanent purpose. If the building is falling down, then supports are added. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 04:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It might be. Image is not in this section however. Even then, the scaffolding is not prominent in this image. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 04:15, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It does appear to still be there... I see no problem with the EV now. Dusty777 19:15, 11 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not seeing scaffolding in the photo that's in that article. Please link to the photo that shows the scaffolding. Thanks, --Pine✉ 06:49, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is the most recent I found. Jkadavoor (talk) 07:32, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:21, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Sayornis phoebe

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2012 at 08:27:18 (UTC)

Original – Eastern phoebe at Madison, Wisconsin, USA.
Alt
Reason
High quality and EV
Articles in which this image appears
Eastern phoebe
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
John Benson
  • 'good' isn't the criteria though - EV is - the alt shows much more plumage.

Promoted File:Sayornis phoebe -Owen Conservation Park, Madison, Wisconsin, USA-8.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:52, 16 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Chicken egg without shell

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2012 at 08:04:21 (UTC)

Original – A raw chicken egg within its membrane, the shell removed by soaking in vinegar.
Crop
New version - The new version from the original .NEF file and very little retouched.
Reason
Illustrates the subject with a good quality.
Articles in which this image appears
Egg (food)
FP category for this image
Category:Food and drink
Creator
User:Gangulybiswarup
It is in the Egg_(food)#Anatomy_and_characteristics section. Shivashree (talk) 11:02, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
The article is filled with so many eggs; so difficult to see on first glance. :) Jkadavoor (talk) 13:54, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
It shows anatomy of the egg, so I think it fits in the anatomy section rather than being at the top. Shivashree (talk) 15:13, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
How odd - it doesn't load that picture on my computer. When I hold my mouse over the white space under the picture showing a cut away with lines pointing at each section, the bar at the bottom of my screen shows the filename, but the picture just doesn't load for me... How strange... Thank you... gazhiley 17:01, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is that the "pawprint" looking white bits at the top? If so I Oppose as well, as I believed that to be part of the egg, and thus it is misleading... gazhiley 16:14, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Is that really lighting? I don't think it is. Looking at this image (not a great example, but the best I could find), there are some small air bubbles on the top of the egg, while the flash is up farther front. SpencerT♦C 00:00, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You're right. This image makes it pretty clear to me: [1]. Support, and sorry for the confusion. Aaadddaaammm (talk) 09:17, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • The retouch is good although in general I prefer photos that are as authentic as possible. For that reason I prefer the original to the retouch. Since the spot on the white surface is not very relevant to the subject of the photo, I will say that I Support original and Weak support retouch and crop after the discussion and looking at the alternatives. --Pine✉ 04:46, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Chicken Egg without Eggshell 5859.jpg --Julia\talk 20:28, 23 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Immaculate Conception

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2012 at 04:51:59 (UTC)

Original – Bartolomé Esteban Murillo painting of the Immaculate Conception
Alt Giovanni Battista Tiepolo
Reason
High Ev as lead image, good quality
Articles in which this image appears
Immaculate Conception, etc
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Bartolomé Esteban Murillo

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 16:01, 21 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Chlorophyllum molybdites

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2012 at 05:04:10 (UTC)

Original – A young false parasol (Chlorophyllum molybdites) mushroom. The tall stipe may be up to 25 cm tall and bears a ring.
Reason
High Quality, Well-framing, Much EV.
Articles in which this image appears
Chlorophyllum molybdites
FP category for this image
Creator
Ianaré Sévi
I added some info referring to size. Alborzagros (talk) 15:49, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:48, 12 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Hercules beetle

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2012 at 04:56:26 (UTC)

Original – Male Hercules beetle, Dynastes hercules ♂, is the most famous and largest of the rhinoceros beetles. It is native to the rainforests of Central America, South America, and the Lesser Antilles. size:15.5 cm
Reason
High Quality, Good Framing, well-shade background and full of EV.
Articles in which this image appears
Hercules beetle
FP category for this image
Creator
Archaeodontosaurus
I added the sex (male ♂) to text.Alborzagros (talk)
The size of insect is written through caption. Alborzagros (talk) 15:53, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
To be dead or not to be. this not question.Alborzagros (talk) 06:57, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
This is a museum specimen. I don't think they can survive for centuries without being dead. :) Jkadavoor (talk) 09:43, 3 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I prefer that the photos used to illustrate our animal articles be photos of live animals if possible. Kaldari (talk) 08:49, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That seems a good point. But focus stacked photos have more details and so more identification information than in a in vivo photo. Focus stacking for a restless subject is very difficult. Jkadavoor (talk) 17:42, 5 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Dynastes hercules ecuatorianus MHNT.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:25, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Cucurbita moschata

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2012 at 13:08:34 (UTC)

Original – Butternut squash, cultivar variety of Cucurbita moschata, ripe fruits. Ukraine.
Reason
High quality and good EV
Articles in which this image appears
Cucurbita moschata, Butternut squash, Winter squash, List of gourds and squashes
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Fruits
Creator
George Chernilevsky

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:23, 13 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Salvia pratensis

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Oct 2012 at 09:23:04 (UTC)

Original – Salvia pratensis macro shot
Reason
High quality and EV
Articles in which this image appears
Salvia pratensis
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
H. Zell

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:27, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



R Coronae Australis region

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2012 at 23:24:44 (UTC)

Original – R Coronae Australis. According to ESO, "The light blue nebulosity seen in this picture is mostly due to the reflection of starlight off small dust particles." "The huge dust cloud in which the reflection nebula is embedded is here shown in impressively fine detail. The subtle colours and varied textures of the dust clouds make this image resemble an impressionist painting. A prominent dark lane crosses the image from the centre to the bottom left. Here the visible light emitted by the stars that are forming inside the cloud is completely absorbed by the dust."
Reason
This is the only photograph in the article Corona Australis and the EV is good. I have expanded the caption in the article.
Articles in which this image appears
Corona Australis
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
European Southern Observatory

Promoted File:R Coronae Australis region.jpg --King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 04:17, 10 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Water well bucket

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Oct 2012 at 04:56:56 (UTC)

Original – Leather bucket of a well
Reason
Quality image, has EV, has a free license, is of high resolution.
Articles in which this image appears
Water well
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Other
Creator
commons:User:Neogeolegend
  • Support as nominator --Mediran talk|contribs 04:56, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is a leather bucket. Jkadavoor (talk) 07:45, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • As what said in the filename and the description of the image from the creator, the bucket was wooden, that's all I know. Mediran talk|contribs 10:31, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      • Please view the image at 1:1; you can see the folds and stitches. Why do you edit the page Water well without contacting the creator of the file? It seems the picture was taken at UAE where people use leather bags as water containers on their horses and camels too. From [3]: "The camel had once provided most of life's necessities for desert nomads: It was a form of transportation, of course, a source of meat and milk, and provided hair to be woven into cloth for tents and storage bags. Its leather was made into sandals, buckets and watering-troughs and its sinews into bowstrings." Jkadavoor (talk) 13:29, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose First off, as stated above, it is a leather bucket. Not that it matters for FP purposes. The EV is low, as the image is only in the article Water well, and I don't think a water bucket illustrates a well fairly well. Lastly, either the focus is off or there is some motion blur, but the bucket is not sharp. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 17:13, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:34, 9 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Peder Severin Krøyer

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2012 at 08:47:56 (UTC)

Original – Peder Severin Krøyer, self portrait, 1888
Reason
A self portrait of the notable Norwegian-Danish painter Peder Severin Krøyer. High quality, great resolution and details.
Articles in which this image appears
Peder Severin Krøyer
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Peder Severin Krøyer
  • Support as nominator --Tomer T (talk) 08:47, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment It appears there are some doubts as to the authenticity of this painting (in Danish). Its provenance is a little muddy and it is very close to the 1888 Uffizi self-portrait which has long been thought to be the only self-portrait by Krøyer from that year. The director of the Skagens museum was apparently unable to confirm its veracity between its listing in the Dorotheum catalogue and its sale in October 2011. If it is a forgery, it is a good one, but while there is doubt there are alternative self portraits to use. Yomanganitalk 12:24, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • So we have a choice whether to accept a lower standard of proof than the experts. However, we must still be sufficient sure about its licencing - if we doubt the authorship more than negligibly, that means that it may still be in copyright. Speaking of which the file doesn't have a valid US copyright tag, e.g. PD-100.Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 13:11, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Comment. Copyright and authenticity are very closely related questions. If it is a forgery, the forger obviously owns the copyright, but will probably be unable to make any claims on it without risking legal trouble himself, making it a de facto free image. If it is an authentic Krøyer, it only has a valid US copyright tag (don't let the template text fool you, the US term is life + 70 years since it was first published in 2011), but is not free enough for commons since it is protected by the 25 years publication rights in the European Union. The only completely safe thing to do licensing-wise is to revert to the grayscale version, which is taken from a 1912 book and completely in the clear, and then revision-delete the colour version. They are different paintings anyway, even though they look almost identical, so maybe they should be uploaded as different files even if this version is kept around. 90.184.205.91 (talk) 17:27, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:56, 8 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Humble Oil Building

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2012 at 21:08:05 (UTC)

Original – The Humble Oil Building in Houston, Texas. It now operates as a hotel, apartment, and retail building.
Reason
High quality, newly created article meets EV requirements
Articles in which this image appears
Humble Oil Building, National Register of Historic Places listings in downtown Houston, Texas
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
User:Jujutacular
  • Support as nominator --Jujutacular (talk) 21:08, 28 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support well captured: good angle and lighting. --ELEKHHT 13:34, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Tomer T (talk) 17:17, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support; looks strong, an excellent example of what pictures of this sort should be. J Milburn (talk) 01:03, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support Mediran talk|contribs 04:59, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment The ground gives me a headache - not sure if it's OOF, or from processing. 141.14.245.242 (talk) 10:15, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Neutral I agree with the IP about lower part of the image. That could use improvement. Otherwise this is good. Pine✉ 23:13, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose I notice Jujutacular's comments on the focus placement. The ground being out of focus is not a big deal to me. I would like the entire building to be in focus, but it is not at neither the top nor the bottom. Jujutacular, or someone else, how difficult would it be to shoot it again, with a tripod, at say f/15+ for wider DOF? I would also like a shot where the sun is on the other side and we don't get the shadow cutting across the lower part of the building. If these are impossible requests, I will weakly support. Otherwise I feel we should wait for a picture without these concerns. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 17:23, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Not impossible, but it may be some time before it happens. I need to line up: a clear day, Sunday (only day I can get to this spot), my schedule free, not get accosted by security. Even if this does pass, I see that there is some hesitancy on the part of the comments here, so I may go back and try to get a better image when possible. Thank you for the recommendations. Jujutacular (talk) 12:44, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • I am not disturbed by that shadow at all, it naturally emphasises the geometry of the building. --ELEKHHT 20:18, 2 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak support. I don't think the ground in the foreground is out of focus, at least not much. At f/8 and with such a distance, it should be in the same focal plane as the building, I would imagine. I suspect that the reason why it looks blurry is that it's been warped more significantly by the perspective correction, so all the detail is being stretched wider. As a result, you can see significantly more chromatic abberation in the bottom of the frame (good example is the white car), but it seems to be present throughout the image, and while stopping down can help minimise this, f/8 is probably appropriate for reasons of sharpness. Juju, if you have access to Adobe Lighroom or Photoshop, you can correct chromatic abberation there. Alternatively, use a superior lens if available. ;-) Ðiliff «» (Talk) 07:55, 4 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Promoted File:Humble Tower.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 23:36, 9 October 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.

Young Galaxy

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2012 at 11:57:46 (UTC)

Original – This artist’s impression shows a young galaxy, about two billion years after the Big Bang, accreting material from the surrounding hydrogen and helium gas and forming many young stars. New results from ESO’s Very Large Telescope have provided the first direct evidence that the accretion of pristine gas alone, without the need for violent major mergers, can fuel vigorous star formation and the growth of massive galaxies in the young Universe.
Reason
Has a free license, has EV, has high resolution. Good representation image of a young galaxy.
Articles in which this image appears
Galaxy
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
ESO/L. Calçada

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:43, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Galactic Center

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Oct 2012 at 11:50:39 (UTC)

Original – The center of Milky Way Galaxy is located in the constellation of Sagittarius. In visible light the lion's share of stars are hidden behind thick clouds of dust. This obscuring dust becomes increasingly transparent at infrared wavelengths. This 2MASS image, covering a field roughly 10 x 8 degrees (about the area of your fist held out at arm's length) reveals multitudes of otherwise hidden stars, penetrating all the way to the central star cluster of the Galaxy. This central core, seen in the upper left portion of the image, is about 25,000 light years away and is thought to harbor a supermassive black hole. The reddening of the stars here and along the Galactic Plane is due to scattering by the dust; it is the same process by which the sun appears to redden as it sets. The densest fields of dust still show up in this mosaic. Also evident are several nebulae to the lower right, including the Cat's Paw Nebula. The 2MASS analysis software has identified and measured the properties of almost 10 million stars in this spectacular field alone.
Reason
Has a free license, has high resolution, has EV, also a good image of the Galactic Center.
Articles in which this image appears
Galactic Center
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
2MASS/G. Kopan, R. Hurt

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:43, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Flame angelfish

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2012 at 23:25:21 (UTC)

Original – Flame angelfish (Centropyge loricula)
Reason
Sharp image, showcasing the details of this nice species
Articles in which this image appears
Flame angelfish
FP category for this image
Animals/Fish
Creator
Andreas März

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



LH 95

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2012 at 09:41:09 (UTC)

Original – "LH 95 is a modestly sized stellar nursery in the Large Magellanic Cloud orbiting the Milky Way"
Reason
Good quality large image, lead image in an article, used in multiple pages
Articles in which this image appears
LH 95, Star formation, Large Magellanic Cloud, List of nearest galaxies. An alternate version was used on Astronomy, Intergalactic travel, and Space colonization which I replaced with this larger version. (As of October 6, I am discussing which version to use for Star on the article's talk page). I also used this image to replace a smaller image that was in Template:Star formation.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
"NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)-ESA/Hubble Collaboration"

Promoted File:LH 95.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:47, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



U.S. Naval Academy Graduation Ceremony

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Oct 2012 at 07:28:11 (UTC)

Original – Newly commissioned U.S. Navy and Marine Corps officers celebrate their new positions by throwing their Midshipmen covers into the air as part of the U.S. Naval Academy class of 2005 graduation and commissioning ceremony.
Reason
The work has good EV - as the primary image of the page for Officer (armed forces) it depicts a milestone ceremony for officers capturing the symbolic 'hat toss'. The aesthetic appeal is evident. The photo is well sourced. While the resolution of the height scrapes under the 1500 pixel minimum guideline, an exception could be made based on the technicality of its framing and uniqueness.
Articles in which this image appears
Officer (armed forces)
FP category for this image
I'm tentatively suggesting Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA_History, although there may be a better one.
Creator
Mate 1st Class Kevin H. Tierney

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:44, 7 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Indian Vulture (Gyps indicus)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2012 at 17:28:00 (UTC)

Original – Vultures in the nest (Gyps indicus), Orchha, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Edit 1
Reason
Exceptional picture of Indian vulture in the nest. Very difficult to take: this bird nests at the top of high buildings, far out of reach from humans. The species is highly endangered following use of deadly chemical by veterinary doctors.
Articles in which this image appears
Indian Vulture, Madhya Pradesh
FP category for this image
Birds
Creator
Yann
  • I'm going to be Neutral on the alt while I'll continue to Oppose the original nom. The alt is a decent image, which could be sharper, though the colors are much better than the original. I agree with others that EV is a bit low unless there is a section about nesting. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 17:25, 1 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 22:45, 7 October 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: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. 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 September 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.

Hitler and Mussolini

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2012 at 11:41:52 (UTC)

File:Hitlermusso2 edit.jpg
Adolf Hitler and Benito Mussolini.
Reason
Too small even by previous standards.
Articles this image appears in
Adolf Hitler and others
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Hitler and Mussolini
Nominator
Brandmeistertalk

Kept --Makeemlighter (talk) 19:28, 30 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Full Moon

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Oct 2012 at 20:50:36 (UTC)

Nearly Full Moon view from earth.
Reason
No longer the best picture available. To be replaced by this nomination. No need for two Featured Pictures of the same thing.
Articles this image appears in
Used only in Template:The Moon (as far as a I know. I'll be checking all links.)
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Full Moon
Nominator
Dusty777

Delisted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:59, 22 October 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 days following closure and subsequently be removed.

Bullock cart

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2012 at 16:54:40 (UTC)

Original – Girl on a bullock cart, Umaria district, Madhya Pradesh, India.
Reason
Good quality image of a traditional bullock-cart (notice the disk wheels). The different parts of the yoke are clearly visible.
Articles in which this image appears
Bullock cart, Yoke
Land vehicles
Creator
Yann

Not Promoted --Julia\talk 23:39, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Crew of STS-107

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2012 at 08:10:13 (UTC)

Original – Official portrait of the crew of Space Shuttle Columbia mission STS-107. On February 1, 2003, Columbia disintegrated during atmospheric reentry and all of the crew died in the accident.
Reason
Good quality official portrait of the crew of Space Shuttle Columbia mission STS-107. On February 1, 2003, Columbia disintegrated during atmospheric reentry and all of the crew died in the accident. While the photo isn't especially striking, it has high historic and encyclopedic value. The photo was previously nominated for Featured Picture in 2006.
Articles in which this image appears
STS-107, Space Shuttle Columbia disaster, and others
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator
NASA
  • Support as nominator --Pine✉ 08:10, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, unless someone can make a case against the technicals. From where I'm sitting the only possible opposition is, as in 2006, that it doesn't have "impact". But it doesn't need to. The EV is huge. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 08:58, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. I'll be honest, I'd like this to be an FP, but I don't think it qualifies. The above mentioned nominations set a precedent, though it is not for the reasons established in those noms that I oppose this one. Let me explain: I think it is safe to say this image adds little to the accident page, as it is not about the accident. Therefore, I think this image should be held to the same standards as all other crew photos when it comes crew photos in articles about the missions. In the few other shuttle mission articles I checked, the crew photos are not featured pictures. Now, if there was an article about the crew of STS-107, this would be a no-brainier support, as the image would illustrate the scope of the article and would not be able to be retaken as they are all dead. But the article is about the mission, not the crew. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 15:03, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
You don't think that the crew, all personally involved, of an accident contributes to an article about the accident? I heartily disagree. If there was a photograph of the Busby Babes then that would contribute to the article on the crash by showing those who died and survived, just like this one. I also question whether FPC really applies a question of precedent at all. We have plenty of renominations that pass the second time, we shouldn't feel bound per se. You might agree with the original objection, you might not. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 15:18, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps I didn't explain myself very well. If the crew were to blame for the accident, then that would be one thing. But they were not. So how much does the image of the crew add to the article of the accident? Some, yes. It is important to know the people that died in the accident. But does it illustrate the accident? That is what I meant, that it adds little in the FP realm. If the image was that of a dead crewmember after the accident, then it would have a enough EV for FP. But this image would be the same one had there been no accident. Hence, my comment that this image should be treated the same as all other spaceship crew photos.
I just checked, neither the Apollo 13 crew picture nor the Apollo 1 crew picture are featured. We already mentioned the Challenger crew photo not being FP. No, I don't think a precedent is binding. Regardless, my comments indicated that I didn't oppose this nom due to the previous noms.
Hopefully that explains where I'm coming from a little better. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 19:34, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I respectfully disagree with you here. There is an article on STS-107 and the composition of the crew is relevant to a shuttle flight. Each crew trains for the specific missions that happened during a specific flight. A photo of good quality for each mission's crew would have its place among FPs if we can get a photo that has sufficient size and technical quality, and I believe that this photo passes those tests for STS-107. Also, wouldn't you say that the identities of the deceased individuals are relevant for showing the consequences of the accident? Pine✉ 21:51, 26 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Most NASA missions will have a good crew shot. Can they all be FPs? Sure. You are correct in that the crew is specific to each mission. The crew is only part of the mission, just as the orbiter is only part of it. The mission itself are all the experiments and work that was done while in orbit by the crew in the shuttle. That is what I think would wholly illustrate the mission and if it is a good image should be FP. I oppose this nom on the basis that it adds to the article because the mission failed. If we decide it is OK for all crew shots (if good) to be FPs, I will support it in that regard. Now, I do not disagree with you that identifying the deceased is important. Their mere picture doesn't fully illustrate the consequences of the accident however. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 02:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just because Apollo 13 nor Apollo 1 have their crew picture as featured, doesn't mean they can't be. I checked also, and neither pictures were ever nominated, so no one knows if they would be promoted or not. That is a poor reason for an Oppose (not to disregard your other reasons.) Dusty777 02:08, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
That wasn't at all a reason for my oppose. Notice how I wrote that after my main explanation of my vote. My point was that this image should be treated as any other crew photo. If we decide to start nominating crew photos (of which there are a lot), I'm OK with that. I just don't think this one deserves to be FP solely on the basis that the crew died. --WingtipvorteX PTT ∅ 02:30, 27 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Crew of STS-107, official photo.jpg --Julia\talk 23:36, 6 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Chesme Church

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Oct 2012 at 08:31:41 (UTC)

Original – Chesme Church, Saint Petersburg, Russia
Reason
Good EV and high quality
Articles in which this image appears
Chesme Church
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
A.Savin
  • It is quite standard to do that at FPC, since in general an image, once nominated, is never reuploaded at the same filename. This way, a user can oppose the original and support the edit to show preference for the edit. -- King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:05, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment: Muhammad, I like your version indeed - would it be OK when I overwrite the previous image by this version? In general, I don't like to have various edits of the same file as separate files, but I'm not familiar with the FPC procedure here. - A.Savin (talk) 09:44, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • We usually have separate files for different edits as this makes it easier to track who supports what. At the end of the nomination, if you still want to overwrite it, discuss with the closer --Muhammad(talk) 14:50, 30 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Spb 06-2012 Chesme Church.jpg --Julia\talk 23:14, 6 October 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=516518100"