Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Makeemlighter (talk | contribs) at 00:22, 13 November 2012 (Closed Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Carrier strike group (Not promoted)). 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




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 [1]. — 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]



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]



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]



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]



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]



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.

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]



Megalith

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2012 at 14:29:38 (UTC)

Original – Megalithic grave "Harhoog" in Keitum, Sylt, Germany.
Reason
High quality, high EV, very impressive
Articles in which this image appears
Megalith, Harhoog
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
Creator
Michael Gäbler
  • Not sure if that was coincidental, but I recognise the name of the photographer that you linked to.. Saffron Blaze? He's a Wikipedia contributor. Maybe he'd be able to upload a higher resolution version of it, if he hasn't already (I haven't checked commons). Ðiliff «» (Talk) 20:30, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Linked image is a tad overcooked, but his other stuff is brill. 192.101.252.103 (talk) 20:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Megalithic grave Harhoog in Keitum, Sylt, Germany.jpg --Makeemlighter (talk) 02:46, 13 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]



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.

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.

Carrier strike group

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2012 at 02:35:52 (UTC)

Original – A navy carrier strike group including the Nimitz-class aircraft carrier USS George Washington (CVN-73)
Reason
Lead image for the article Carrier strike group, good EV, nice colors, good clarity
Articles in which this image appears
Carrier strike group, Carrier battle group, Nimitz-class aircraft carrier
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water
Creator
Photographer's Mate 3rd Class Christopher Stephens
  • It says in the caption in Carrier strike group that "such a formation would not be used in combat", and it also states that "ships assigned to the USS George Washington Carrier Strike Group sail in formation for a strike group photo". It appears that is was probably set up for the purpose of taking a picture, so the EV is not very high. Dusty777 17:14, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Inner radius

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2012 at 10:51:44 (UTC)

Original – The circumradius (blue) and inner radius (green) of a set (dark red, with its convex hull shown as the lighter red dashed lines). The inner radius is smaller than the circumradius except for subsets of a single subset (a disc), for which they are equal.
Reason
Best illustration and perhaps the only illustration in the literature, which simply uses the definitions (without illustration). The distinction between inner radius and circumradius explains why the Shapley–Folkman–Starr theorem is an improvement over the Shapley–Folkman theorem.
Articles in which this image appears
Shapley–Folkman lemma
FP category for this image
Mathematics
Creator
David Eppstein
  • Support as nominator --Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:51, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, educational and encyclopedic. Also, SCIENCE! — Cirt (talk) 17:17, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I'd like to see some verification provided. I assume there is some academic paper or textbook that could be cited to show that the information presented is correct. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:44, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    Reply The information is correct because it simply applies the definitions found in the original article (Starr). I understand that supremum and infimum operators are difficult to understand for persons who've not studied university mathematics; you could ask at the WikiProject Mathematics for additional confirmations. However, Jacob Scholbach, Geometry guy, and other mathematicians have scrutinized the article as it went through GA and A class nominations (successful) and its FA nomination (unsuccessful, because of failure on "brilliant prose"): Perhaps you could first scan those nominations and judge the comments about the content and its being based on reliable sources, before asking for new confirmations? (In response to your query, I left a notice at the WikiProject Mathematics.) Sincerely, Kiefer.Wolfowitz 10:13, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a little more detailed explanation of correctness that can be given. The outer circle is optimal because it has three points forming an acute triangle on its boundary; enclosing all three of these points by a different circle would be larger, regardless of whether it contains any of the other points. For the same reason the inner circle can't be changed to be near to its current position without making it smaller. and in the other parts of the point set the points are placed so densely as to make it obvious that there is no larger inner circle anywhere else. —David Eppstein (talk) 15:51, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment A (now retired) member of the WikiProject Images and Media wrote "All I can say about its illustrations is that 'I am impressed'. Excellent.", in response for a request for an evaluation. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 11:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hmm, the criteria were a little more lenient on this point than I'd expected - they allow for verification in the article. Whilst I am uncertain whether that ought to be allowed, it clearly is. I'm certain this is supported by the sources in the article. Support. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 11:47, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    This seems to me to be a self-evident illustration of the concepts. The set is finite (and hence compact), and so the extrema are attained: The radii can be confirmed using a protractor (as in sophomore geometry in US high schools). The inequality of the radii is obvious. What is your concern? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 12:14, 5 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry, I should have replied sooner. My concern is with verifiability. One man's self-evident is different to another man's, surely a princple we apply to articles all the time. For me to be able to verify the image, I'd need to look at an outside work, a book or article. Now I was under the impression, when I first commented, that such verification had to be given on the image page, but I was mistaken. In this case, it is clearly provided in the article and its sources. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 16:31, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:22, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Shapley–Folkman lemma

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2012 at 10:32:28 (UTC)

Original – The Shapley–Folkman lemma is illustrated by the Minkowski addition of four sets. The point (+) in the convex hull of the Minkowski sum of the four non-convex sets (right) is the sum of four points (+) from the (left-hand) sets—two points in two non-convex sets plus two points in the convex hulls of two sets. The convex hulls are shaded pink. The original sets each have exactly two points (shown as red dots).
Reason
This is the best illustration of the Shapley–Folkman lemma in human history. Shapley's 2012 receipt of the Nobel Prize in Economics (to be awarded in December) makes this topical.
Articles in which this image appears
Shapley–Folkman lemma, Minkowski addition, Zonohedron (Zonotope), oriented matroid, Ivar Ekeland.
FP category for this image
Mathematics
Creator
David Eppstein
I'm afraid I still find this unintelligible. I have no idea at all what this diagram is supposed to be illustrating. 86.146.108.178 (talk) 00:05, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment Its taken me a while to understand the picture. It wasn't until I got down to Shapley–Folkman lemma#Statements that in became clear. The statement which made it clear was if a point x lies in the convex hull of the Minkowski sum of N sets then x lies in the sum of the convex hulls of the summand-sets. Even that needs some decoding, first take the four sets on the left which consist of two points each. Take all posible sums of points from each set (the Minkowski sum) this gives the 16 red dots on the left. Next form the convex hull, imaging stretching a rubber band around all the points, the convex hull is all the points inside the band, this gives the pink region on the right. The convex hull of each of the sets on the left is just the pink lines joining the dots. Finally we get to the lemma, take any point in the pink region on the right, this must be the sum of four points on the pink lines on the left. This is illustrated by the + signs.
As to the actual image, one you understand the lemma it is a very elegant illustration. However, it maybe a bit too concise, trying to put everything in one diagram, which is a impressive feet, may make it a bit harder to follow. The steps could be broken down into 4 or 6 images. A) the four sets, just with the dots, B) their Minkowski sum - the 16 dots on right, C) & D) convex hulls of A) & B), E) & F) final pic with + signs. A caption making it clear that the 16 dots on the right is the MS of the sets on the left might also help. --Salix (talk): 00:47, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the substantial comments. :) The statement that the convex hull of the sum is the sum of the convex hulls is a preliminary result, not the Shapley Folkman lemma (which states that an even more surprising fact, which is illustrated by David's drawing)! Kiefer.Wolfowitz 16:54, 6 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Ah get it now. As the dimension of problem is 2 the point must be the sum of four points only 2 of which can be in the convex hulls.
Rather than a featured picture I think this would be a good candidate for the Picture of the Month in Portal:Mathematics. It would need a much improved caption so its clear what the statement of the lemma really is. Maths picture of the month does allow for a more extensive caption. Its also worth pointing out the significance of the lemma as Shapley won the 2012 Nobel Memorial Prize in Economic Sciences.--Salix (talk): 12:35, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Rather than "can be", you mean "need be", I think. :)
The criteria for featured pictures do not include general accessibility, as far as I read. Would you, Tomcat, or the IP link this policy, please? Kiefer.Wolfowitz 17:59, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
My knowledge of Wikipedia policy does not extend that far I'm afraid! However, I would argue that the image has no great intrinsic skill or merit, and is something that anyone with a basic familiarity with computer drawing packages could easily produce. Therefore, its only potential claim to fame* is its explanatory power, and I currently find its explanatory power conspicuously lacking. You could say it explains the theorem to people who already understand it, but is unintelligible to people who don't. 86.167.19.237 (talk) 21:27, 7 November 2012 (UTC) * I mean, in a "featured picture" sense. I'm sure it is a very worthwhile addition to the article itself...[reply]
David's picture was the first and may be the only illustration of the Shapley-Folkman lemma in world literature. You can see some hand-waving illustrations of the "convexification on average of Minkowski addition" in Mas-Colell's New Palgrave article on convexity and in Dimitri Bertsekas's book on nonlinear programming (cited in our SF lemma article), but there may still be no other illustration of the SF lemma---certainly not before Eppstein's picture (2010).
The criterion for judging pictures is the picture's contribution to the article, not the accessibility of the mathematical theorem (or the technique needed to produce this illustration, once David has made the conceptual break-throughs). David is a Professor of Computer Science who specializes in computational geometry, and I suspect that his use of colors, etc., rewards attention.
I thank you for ending the paragraph with a conciliatory sentence. Indeed, de gustibus non est disputandum. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 22:03, 7 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Right, it may be that I am misunderstanding the scope of the "featured picture" award. I imagined featured pictures ought to be of fairly wide appeal and interest, and accessible, at least on some level, to most people reading the encyclopedia. If that's not the case then my objections on the grounds that almost everyone won't understand it go away. 86.167.19.237 (talk) 00:09, 8 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Support Yes, it does illustrate the lemma. But I'm not convinced it does so really clearly. The example given in the text of article is much easier to understand ('The Shapley–Folkman lemma implies, for example, that every point in [0, 2] is the sum of an integer from {0, 1} and a real number from [0, 1]'). JJ Harrison (talk) 13:03, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    A one-dimension illustration on a two-dimensional computer-screen would not capture the imagination.Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:16, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

My support is weak because I think three points in the plane might be less confusing.

I suppose that you mean three pairs of points (to be summed).
The lemma states a proposition that depends on the dimension of the space and not on the number of summands. So having four summands illustrates this take-home message, which is the reason that this lemma is so important in economics.
I had the same thought. :) However, Three pairs of distinct points (having line segments as their convex hulls) would be simpler, yet three summands do not lend themselves to symmetric graphical-representation. David's four-windows treat the four summands symmetrically. Kiefer.Wolfowitz 13:10, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]


Harald zur Hausen

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2012 at 17:23:13 (UTC)

Original – Harald zur Hausen at the 4th International Alumni Meeting at the German Cancer Reasearch Center (DKFZ) in Heidelberg, June 2010
Alt
Reason
Important figure, successful portrait, good quality
Articles in which this image appears
Harald zur Hausen
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator
Kuebi

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 00:21, 13 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Nepali woman

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2012 at 06:56:56 (UTC)

Original – Nepali woman photographed on the Annapurna Circuit in Ghyaru, northern Nepal.
Reason
Good quality portrait; high EV, especially for Wrinkle; Commons FP
Articles in which this image appears
Wrinkle, Demographics of Nepal
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator
travelwayoflife
  • Support as nominator --—Bruce1eetalk 06:56, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, applicable for usage on multiple articles, educational, encyclopedic, high value and high quality. — Cirt (talk) 16:34, 2 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Weak Oppose I'm getting a strong sense that this has had an unnatural level of post processing, in particular that kitschy bleach bypass type effect. It weakens the EV. JJ Harrison (talk) 00:32, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment. This kind of photo would always be move valuable with more information, as its limited, not terribly helpful use in articles demonstrates. It would be more valuable in wrinkle if her age were known, more valuable in Demographics of Nepal (and potentially other articles) if her ethnicity were known. Chick Bowen 01:46, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Unfortunately the photographer did not publish this information here, probably because it was not known. —Bruce1eetalk 06:30, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    • Manang is not ethnically heterogeneous. People from manag are called nyeshang or manang-bas; they speak their own language, Manang language, and are adherents of Bon. Several volumes have been published on the region and are likely to contain further information if required. Also note that for the purposes of the 2001 Nepal census, Bonpo were lumped with buddhists; fwiw, by this classification, only 3 of the 515 people in the village administration area were *not* "bouddha" in religious orientation; these three were Hindu, which we can exclude with a high degree of certainty for the woman depicted. Samsara (FA • FP) 13:53, 4 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 01:16, 12 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



Dom Luís Bridge, Porto

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2012 at 14:53:01 (UTC)

Original – Dom Luis I bridge, Porto, Portugal
Reason
High EV and good quality
Articles in which this image appears
Dom Luís Bridge, Porto
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Poco a poco

Promoted File:Puente Don Luis I, Oporto, Portugal, 2012-05-09, DD 13.JPG --Makeemlighter (talk) 21:48, 10 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]



European Southern Observatory trailer, 2011

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2012 at 09:31:14 (UTC)

Reason
High EV video explaining the work of the European Southern Observatory
Articles in which this image appears
European Southern Observatory
FP category for this image
link to category from WP:FP that best describes the image (check categories first)
Creator
European Southern Observatory

Not Promoted --Makeemlighter (talk) 21:45, 10 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=522731840"