Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 15:09, 12 June 2019

Skip to:

Table of contents
Current nominations
To be closed
More input needed
Recently closed
Suspended candidates

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.

FPCs needing feedback view edit

Current nominations

Inside room of Teatro Colón, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2019 at 15:09:27 (UTC)

Reason: High resolution image of the inside of Teatro Colón (Columbus Theatre)
Articles in which this image appears: Teatro Colón
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others
Creator: Gobierno de la Ciudad de Buenos Aires - Buenos Aires City Government

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 02:14, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Temporary oppose Hi LLcentury, thanks very much for nominating that image. I am inclined to support the image for FP, but the Wikipedia:Featured picture criteria include the statement "It is preferable to wait a reasonable period of time (at least 7 days) after the image is added to the article before nominating it, though this may be ignored in obvious cases, such as replacing a low-resolution version of an image with a higher resolution of the same image." I suggest that you withdraw this present nomination but return in seven days if the image remains in the article at that time. Thanks again for your nomination, and in the meantime you can look for other images that have been in articles for at least seven days and/or you can vote on existing nominations. Welcome to Featured picture candidates, and I hope that you will remain active here. --Pine (✉) 02:30, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

● Comment Perfect! I return in 7 days! Thanks for the info! Withdraw it freely! LLcentury (talk) 02:35, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Resubmitting or doing it all over again? Hope I am doing the correct thing. Thanks --LLcentury (talk) 15:13, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Updated expiry date, per the timestamp of this edit. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:04, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - distortion and JPEG artifacting on the seats. Right idea, but execution falls short. MER-C 20:12, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I like the composition and I think the distortion is a fair price to pay for getting this nice wide view of the theatre. But there is more unsharpness and chromatic aberration than I'm comfortable with. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:33, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:17, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Marino Faliero

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2019 at 02:21:38 (UTC)

Reason: A high-resolution, beautiful, colour image of the première of a Donizetti opera, from 1835 (and, annoyingly, in WAY better condition than the Massenet posters, which are, like, half a century younger!). Colour is a little basic, but proper colour lithographs were still in development then, and this is great for the time. Plus, it uses what colour it does have very effectively despite the simplicity.
Articles in which this image appears: Marino Faliero (opera)
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: Luigi Verardi after Dominico Ferri, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 02:21, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Very nice picture, I only regret the film grain if that's what it's called, but nonetheless I think it's normal on such images from my lack of knowledge. Nice job Adam. --LLcentury (talk) 11:10, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment It's a lithographic print. The "grain" is inherent in the printing technique, not a defect. Halftones need to be "grainy" or "screened" in litho printing. --Janke | Talk 16:22, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Well, Halftone isn't quite the word I'd choose, as that's usually used for a different technique. But, aye. The point of lithography is you put acid on rocks to make pits to hold ink. It's essentially random at a fine scale. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 22:38, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ehrmmm... not quite. Lithography is planographic, like offset printing. The image is drawn on the stone with fatty media that will hold ink, while the wet stone won't... Any pits only give a "tooth" to the surface, hence the drawing will be "grainy". --Janke | Talk 13:54, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Support - forgot that in the above treatise... ;-) --Janke | Talk 07:42, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 20:15, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:54, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:29, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I fell compelled, also, to note that I have actually seen this piece live. I call it That Night the Soprano Lost Her Place and the Whole Thing Ground to a Halt. (Pity, because it was otherwise quite a good night, I thought.) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 01:12, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Luigi Verardi after Dominico Ferri - Gaetano Donizetti - Carrefour de St Jean et Paul. Dans l'Opéra Marino Faliero.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 03:58, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Byun Yo-han

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2019 at 12:52:15 (UTC)

Reason: High resolution picture of a not so known South Korean actor
Articles in which this image appears: Byun Yo-han
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: Explicit

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 12:52, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The subject is notable and we have many photos of him but I think this one is the best. The image quality is high, composition ok, and facial expression good. The text is a little distracting, but on the other hand it sets the Korean context for those who might not know him but recognize the script. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Although I'd prefer it less... tight. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 16:46, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per David Eppstein. Geoffroi (talk) 20:39, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks all for your feedback, it really doesn't work. Resubmitting again for quorum. Thanks. --LLcentury (talk) 11:55, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:40, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:40, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Common leopard gecko

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2019 at 09:08:51 (UTC)

Reason: Good quality and high EV
Articles in which this image appears: Common leopard gecko, Carrier's constraint
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator: George Chernilevsky

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 09:08, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support as author -- George Chernilevsky ^talk 10:20, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - --LLcentury (talk) 12:38, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - harsh lighting, average composition. MER-C 16:34, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the composition doesn't really give a good depiction of the head. Mattximus (talk) 22:35, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fine 4 me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:46, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MER-C.--Vulp here 12:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per MER-C. Geoffroi (talk) 01:14, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:38, 21 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Squaw Valley Ski Resort aerial tram

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2019 at 21:10:33 (UTC)

Reason: Good EV and high quality
Articles in which this image appears: Squaw Valley Ski Resort
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Air
Creator: User:Frank Schulenburg

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 21:10, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose it's very hard to find EV for a ski resort with no snow at all in the image... Mattximus (talk) 22:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Mattximus. Geoffroi (talk) 23:20, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Vulp here 12:28, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. File:Squaw Valley Cable Car.jpg has an ugly blue cast, a weird obstacle in the top right corner, and is too low-res, but it has snow and it also shows how close everything is to Lake Tahoe. It gives a good idea of how much better a picture of this subject could be if it only combined the general image quality of this one with a better choice of date and vantage point. —David Eppstein (talk) 06:38, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 22:57, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Tensai Okamura

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2019 at 17:22:48 (UTC)

Reason: Good face front shot
Articles in which this image appears: Tensai Okamura
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: Georges Seguin (Okki)

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 17:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Uninterestingly framed, with a background line growing out the top of his head. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:03, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment and just out of complete ignorance for which I apologize. Is that fixable? Very very kind regards. --LLcentury (talk) 18:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- The framing, yes, the line no. But fixability is not an FPC criterion. We have I don't know how many tens or hundreds of thousands of competently exposed and focused headshots on Wikipedia; we should be looking for images that go beyond that. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:37, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - I could totally edit out the line if we want it gone. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 20:35, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adam Cuerden Could you do that for me please? I am totally inutil (word in Spanish for incompetent) --LLcentury (talk) 22:33, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Adam! As always you with your aid! --LLcentury (talk) 11:20, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulp here 12:10, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 03:36, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:08, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:08, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Beijing New Airport

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2019 at 06:22:39 (UTC)

Reason: high resolution, good composition, difficult to replicate (drones disallowed afterwards)
Articles in which this image appears: Beijing Daxing International Airport
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Taken and modified by 王之桐

Support as nominator – David290 (talk) 06:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - From Commons FPC: "[this image] is processed by original author in order to give highlight to the subject (airport terminal building) itself. The photo was taken in real color, and then processed into grey-scale in most area except the terminal building". MER-C 10:19, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose strange post-processing, would have much higher EV if it was in the original colour. Mattximus (talk) 11:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - confusing color, due to post processing DannyS712 (talk) 16:20, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above votes. Geoffroi (talk) 21:00, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:22, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nebamun garden

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2019 at 14:39:06 (UTC)

Reason: high quality picture of a famous fresco, used as lead
Articles in which this image appears: Tomb of Nebamun, Nebamun, Gardens of ancient Egypt, Ancient Egyptian architecture, Art of ancient Egypt, History of gardening, Blue
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others
Creator: Yann

Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 14:39, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – the bottom has slightly brighter background and it shows at thumbnail size. Bammesk (talk) 17:42, 9 June 2019 (UTC) . . . Can the bottom be improved?[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:10, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 19:37, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support For something that's so iconic, and I presume on display, less than 100dpi seems a little low. But it's well above our minimums. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 19:24, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:42, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Le Jardin de Nébamoun.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:56, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Trier 1572

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2019 at 13:30:12 (UTC)

Reason: Reproduction of a print from a private archive in good enough to pass Commons FPC unanimously last year without the need for restoration.
Articles in which this image appears: History of Trier, Georg Braun, Frans Hogenberg
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Maps
Creator: Frans Hogenberg and Georg Braun, reproduction by Palauenc05

Support as nominator – MER-C 13:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 17:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 18:08, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 19:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:12, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support nice. Pops out beautifully. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 19:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Braun&Hogenberg Trier 1572.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:43, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Male proboscis monkey

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2019 at 13:21:14 (UTC)

Reason: EV. I literally had no idea such a species existed. Looking at this photo has changed my world view.
Articles in which this image appears: Proboscis monkey
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – --- Coffeeandcrumbs 13:21, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Nice Jimmy Durante impersonation - the DOF is a bit shallow, eyes are not quite sharp, thus, Weak oppose. --Janke | Talk 17:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:38, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Northern Royal Albatross

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2019 at 09:40:59 (UTC)

Reason: High EV photo of endangered species.
Articles in which this image appears: Northern royal albatross
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 09:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 13:43, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 19:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wouldn't mind a little more resolution, but for an action shot like this, it's excellent. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 17:04, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Looks good to me. Mattximus (talk) 22:23, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good shot. --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:33, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Beautiful.--Vulp here 12:13, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Diomedea sanfordi - SE Tasmania 2019.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:33, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ruddy Turnstone

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2019 at 09:41:22 (UTC)

Reason: Meets criteria!
Articles in which this image appears: Ruddy Turnstone
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 09:41, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support both, prefer crop. MER-C 13:42, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 17:32, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment – The foreground bokeh looks odd, its transition to the in focus area is abrupt, as if it is software generated, or the result of some sort of focus or aperture stacking. Bammesk (talk) 23:35, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be a peak and trough in the rock where that occurs. MER-C 10:21, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support Alt 1 Geoffroi (talk) 19:40, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I find the foreground a little too distracting, but would support a slight crop. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 17:01, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I agree with Adam Cuerden, just a slight crop from the bottom would make the blurred foreground less distracting. Mattximus (talk) 22:25, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
@JJ Harrison, MER-C, Bammesk, Geoffroi, and Mattximus: I've uploaded a crop. Also, Support Alt 1 Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 10:28, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I yield to JJ Harrison. Bammesk (talk) 01:55, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I don't feel strongly about this. :) JJ Harrison (talk) 03:50, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: You've cropped too much from the right. Never a good idea to crop a wildlife photographer's image. Just ask and see if he/she agrees. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:36, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Arenaria interpres 2 - Boat Harbour (cropped).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:53, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree with Armbrust's reading of consensus. JJ Harrison's comment above "I don't feel strongly about this" shows dissatisfaction and resistance, it doesn't show willingness and support. I see 3 supports for the Original and 3 for the Alternate, not enough to promote either version. I have moved the nom to this section, hoping we get clarity. Pinging participants in case some may choose to comment: @JJ Harrison, MER-C, Geoffroi, Adam Cuerden, Mattximus, Charlesjsharp, and Armbrust:. Bammesk (talk) 01:49, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I think JJ Harrison is the one who should say. I read it as "I'm fine either way." Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 02:41, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

In "I don't feel strongly about this", I hear more resistance than acceptance. I agree that JJ Harrison can clarify. As is, I think we shouldn't close it as promote. Bammesk (talk) 03:35, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Adam Cuerden. The smiley face looks like acceptance to me. Geoffroi (talk) 06:03, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I agree with Adam. I would have closed this debate the same way. MER-C 14:55, 20 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, if JJ Harrison doesn't reply in a few days, I am Ok with closing the nom as is. Bammesk (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Take my comment to mean support of either. JJ Harrison (talk) 03:45, 17 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose Alt 1. Neutral on original Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:41, 20 June 2019 (UTC)*[reply]

Charles, there is no Alt 2. I think you mean neutral on Original, and oppose Alt 1. Bammesk (talk) 15:08, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

indeed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:18, 22 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Kim Jong-un

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2019 at 15:44:03 (UTC)

Reason: Modern, good face shot, of North Korea Supreme Leader Kim Jong-un
Articles in which this image appears: Kim Jong-un
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Korea.net (official website of the Republic of Korea)

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 15:44, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 18:37, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment So is this from the North Korean, or the South Korean government? Also, is North Korea part of international copyright laws? Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 23:47, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It's from the Government of South Korea, please see Copyright law of North Korea for clarification< --LLcentury (talk) 02:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'd prefer it if the copyright had been checked before deletion, but, since this seems unlikely, Support barring evidence that the copyright tag might be wrong. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 03:00, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize If I failed in the copyright checking, I thought that since it is property of the Government of South Korea, they could do whatever they wanted with it. Cheers. --LLcentury (talk) 03:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, no, it's probably fine. Just, if you look, the tag says it wasn't checked before it was deleted from Flickr. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 13:32, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Right clothes, right date, and right location. Seems to check out. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:52, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support.--Vulp here 12:14, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Remember when we use to only have a sketch of him. I miss the pre-Trump days. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 15:49, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support this glorious image of our Supreme Leader. MER-C 17:08, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:45, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Werther

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Jun 2019 at 12:18:24 (UTC)

Reason: A poster for the original French production, in high resolution. A low-quality copy has been used for years.
Articles in which this image appears: Werther, Jules Massenet
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: Eugène Grasset; restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 12:18, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – nice restoration. Bammesk (talk) 13:17, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 17:09, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:38, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 18:37, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:18, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:14, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Eugène Grasset - Jules Massenet - Werther.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 12:19, 18 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sharif Sheikh Ahmed

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2019 at 11:04:17 (UTC)

Reason: I think it's a good face shot.
Articles in which this image appears: Sharif Sheikh Ahmed
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: U.S. Navy photo by Mass Communication Specialist 2nd Class Jesse B. Awalt/Released

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 11:04, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The huge earpiece he's wearing to listen to a translation spoils the shot, and the bored facial expression isn't great. Nick-D (talk) 07:48, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Perfectly, I completely and profusely respect your position and you may be correct, but let me blear that it's not his fault to not understand English. --LLcentury (talk) 13:31, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don't accuse me of some kind of discriminatory views - this is an FPC, and the earpiece ruins the photo as a portrait of Mr Ahmed. I neither know nor care what languages he has. I've used earpieces like this at meetings myself and understand both why they're absolutely necessary and why he looks so bored. Bear in mind that the UN has lots of official languages, and even more are used at leaders-level events, so probably almost all of the people in the room were using the things. Nick-D (talk) 23:16, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nick-D I never meant to accuse you of anything. Just stated a fact. If you felt offended, I apologize. --LLcentury (talk) 18:27, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose It's not the fact that he has an earpiece, but that the big earpiece visually spoils the picture. --Janke | Talk 18:26, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Yes there must be a better picture without a giant ear piece. Mattximus (talk) 22:26, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose that earpiece is too distracting.--Vulp here 12:15, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak oppose but the earpiece is not a problem. It adds EV. (He is at a UN meeting.) The problem is composition; most of his right shoulder is cut off which makes the photo strangely imbalanced. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 03:01, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:22, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Neil Patrick Harris

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2019 at 03:33:14 (UTC)

Reason: Good image of a genuine laugh from this highly notable entertainer.
Articles in which this image appears: Neil Patrick Harris
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:33, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
comment nice snapshot, but is it really encyclopaedic? Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:54, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – A snapshot of an entertainer "meeting fans" at a commercial event called BookCon. Seems promotional, lacks EV regarding the subject's professional roles. Sca (talk) 13:37, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - distracting text in background; objection by Bammesk in Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Nic Stone applies equally here as well. MER-C 11:05, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Agree re distracting text. Sca (talk) 14:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I rather like it - I think it has potential - but wonder about a slightly tighter crop, perhaps? Wouldn't remove the text issue entirely, but it might help the composition a bit. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:21, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - text in background is distracting (comments in Nic Stone also apply), there is something jutting in from the bottom left corner DannyS712 (talk) 16:22, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The background ruined the image.--Vulp here 12:17, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:07, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

R. J. Palacio

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2019 at 03:27:12 (UTC)

Reason: high-quality image of a notable author
Articles in which this image appears: R. J. Palacio
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Artists_and_writers
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:27, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – A snapshot of an author and graphic designer at a commercial event called BookCon. Lacks EV regarding the subject's career, and the target article about her is a stub. Seems promotional. Distracting text in background. – Sca (talk) 13:44, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"Promotional"? I went to a convention as a volunteer specifically to take pictures for Wikipedia. Does that context ruin the value of the photo because it's a "commercial event"? She has an article and passes our notability criteria. There's no requirement that the article a picture is in be at a particular state. You can always WP:SOFIXIT, of course. What sort of picture would add "EV regarding the subject's career"? This is an author and illustrator at an event for authors and illustrators, signing a book she authored and illustrated. Oppose if you don't think it's a good picture, sure, but the rest is irrelevant. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 14:27, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding "promotional," it seems you are promoting the subjects of these photos, for whatever reasons you may have. IMO, neither photo fulfills Criterion No. 5. Others may differ. – Sca (talk) 17:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

From today's Main Page, here's an example of a photo that embodies at least some EV regarding the subject's career.
– Sca (talk) 12:57, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Here's another. – Sca (talk) 13:18, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Putting aside, for a moment, your bizarre accusation of bad faith... I didn't ask for what photo you think adds EV for a random subject. That's an athlete. There's an obvious context for an athlete: at an athletic event. What sort of picture would add EV for this subject? The equivalent of an athlete with a tennis racket smiling off to a fan at a sporting event -- if it is not an author with a book smiling off to a fan at an author event, what is it? Authors don't have a uniform or a prop other than a book or a pen. They don't make their living doing things in front of people; they make their living in a room at home, writing. They support that work through this kind of event. Sure, some authors become celebrities and make other kinds of public appearances, and some authors' work lends to some form of public performance, but for a typical fiction author, unless they're also teaching, this is the visible part of their career -- showing up and signing books. In other words, you have not clarified, but just further reinforced that you continue to operate according to your own inscrutable FP criteria. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 13:29, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I did not accuse you of bad faith. – Sca (talk) 13:49, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It seems you are promoting the point of view that going to an event known to involve famous authors, with the intent of improving our coverage of pictures of famous authors, is promotionalism. Where do you think open-access-licensed pictures come from? Would it be more appropriate and less promotional to wait until those authors tell their publicists to release a photo as open access, rather than using photos from a volunteer Wikipedian? Do your opinionated edits count as promotionalism for your opinion? Should your promotionalism of your opinion disqualify you from contributing to FPC? Because that may not make much sense, but neither does what you are saying. —David Eppstein (talk) 20:41, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

"promoting the subjects of these photos"? Otherwise known as taking photographs to illustrate Wikipedia articles? Strange interpretation of "promoting". And what relevance is stubbiness of target article? PamD 20:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

And lacking Encyclopedic Value? What can be more valuable to the encyclopedia than an image of the person who is the subject of the article. I don't understand that comment. PamD 21:09, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article illustrated remains a 75-word stub. The "stubbiness" of the target article is relevant because stubs provide little information and therefore have little EV. – Sca (talk) 13:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support: good quality illustration of notable writer. PamD 20:56, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support for the reasons above. On a side note, I think it's great that Rhododendrites has had the gumption to go and take this photo of R. J. Palacio and the skills to make it a good quality photo to boot. -Yupik (talk) 21:04, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - distracting text in background; objection by Bammesk in Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Nic Stone applies equally here as well. MER-C 11:05, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
For the record, I am one of the most active admins against WP:UPE and covert advertisers and do not agree with the promotional comment. MER-C 13:02, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Heaven knows where we're meant to get pictures from, if people object to promotional photos (even when they're not actually promotional), object to unposed ones, regularly reject posed ones as too forced in the past, and object to pretty much any background. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 12:21, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – I am neutral on voting. I would have supported if the glass frame wasn't covering her eyes so much (and I might be too strict on this). I agree with David Eppstein and others above. Bammesk (talk) 12:44, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support. I like the facial expression and it's a good action shot of a book author doing something relevant to her notability (signing one of her books), a better choice than just a straight headshot. And I think the background text is ok because it sets a context that is relevant for the photo. But the capture is a bit noisy and her signing hand and pen aren't quite in focus. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:43, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 18:40, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
oppose - Distracting text in the background Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:06, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - text in background isn't that distracting, honestly. And I like the composition. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:17, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Good composition, nice capture of expression, background text is legible enough to add context but de-emphasized enough not to be clutter. XOR'easter (talk) 20:27, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Fine 4 me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:35, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Charlesjsharp.--Vulp here 12:27, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:RJ Palacio at BookCon (16102).jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

With 8,5 supports and 4 opposes this nomination is barelly passing (68%). Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:19, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Baptismal site of Jesus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Jun 2019 at 02:06:21 (UTC)

Reason: High technical standard and composition (QI). Rare picture, compelling with Jordanian site in the background and active baptisms occurring. Landmines surround the area. Adds to Jesus article in the appropriate section (Historicity of events#Baptism)
Articles in which this image appears: Jesus, fr:Jésus-Christ
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Religion and mythology
Creator: E.3

Support as nominator – E.3 (talk) 02:06, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose, for two reasons: 1. Has not been in article the required time. 2. This is a modern construction, thus I don't see the EV in that article. --Janke | Talk 08:53, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose - poor composition (tree) and sharpness. MER-C 10:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per Mer-C and Janke. Geoffroi (talk) 16:48, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Vulp here 12:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 04:05, 17 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Jewel Changi Airport Vortex

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2019 at 23:17:27 (UTC)

**Original** – HSBC Rain Vortex inside the "Jewel" area at Changi Airport, Singapore

Reason: The photograph has high technical quality and is dramatically lit. It illustrates a newly opened building well.
Articles in which this image appears: The Rain Vortex,Jewel Changi Airport
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator: Matteo Morando

Support as nominator – cmɢʟee⎆τaʟκ 23:17, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – good composition and EV, but when viewed at at full size there are too many unsharp leaves. Bammesk (talk) 02:48, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support For the size of the image, I can forgive the slight blurriness. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 22:25, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
SupportDavid290 (talk) 06:10, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:36, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Tomer T (talk) 10:45, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:18, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:JewelSingaporeVortex1.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 23:19, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pacu jawi

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2019 at 19:15:27 (UTC)

Reason: A little noisy, however the appeal is obvious.
Articles in which this image appears: Pacu jawi
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Sport
Creator: Rodney Ee

Support as nominator – MER-C 19:15, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 19:39, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – the flickr license is now non-commercial, it must have changed since the 2015 upload to Commons. Bammesk (talk) 02:00, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Oppose - It's a striking image, to be sure. The problem is it's just such a severely compressed jpg. It's a 19 megapixel photo squeezed down into a 1.55 megabyte file, and it shows in the quality. If it were a one-of-a-kind shot the EV would push me the other way, but we actually have a category full of them. — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:11, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – DreamSparrow ^Chat 04:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Mimihitam (talk) 07:07, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I'm not catching any undue noise at full size. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:22, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Dramatic action shot which clearly illustrates the subject. Nick-D (talk) 01:15, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 08:37, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:19, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Mud Cow Racing - Pacu Jawi - West Sumatra, Indonesia.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:47, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Wilhelm Keitel signing unconditional surrender

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2019 at 12:21:37 (UTC)

Reason: This is the ~~only~~best available photo of this historic event. Previously nominated at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/V-E Day. There is simply no way to avoid the headless men.
Articles in which this image appears: End of World War II in Europe, Victory in Europe Day + 5
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
Creator: Lt. Moore (US Army), edited by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – --- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:21, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, what a pity the head of the other man is not seen!, However, a good shot and interesting event. --LLcentury (talk) 12:23, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – A justly famous photo that obviously has been around since the event 74 years ago. My question: Why would we promote this familiar, widely known image now? – Sca (talk) 12:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

PS: Interesting that the Herr Generalfeldmarschall removed only one glove to sign the document. – Sca (talk) 12:52, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

WP:FP?: The same reason we promote any FP because it [a]dds significant encyclopedic value to an article and helps readers to understand an article. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 13:18, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sure – but how does a photo that's been extant for 74 years, one that's been displayed in the target article End of World War II in Europe for at least eight years (probably longer), and one that was added to the sidebar article Victory in Europe Day (by me) three years ago, now suddenly add significant EV? – Sca (talk) 16:22, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand where you got "newness" criterion? That is not based on any policy for how we choose FP. The photo has always added significant EV and should have always been featured. It is among the best content on Wikipedia--- Coffeeandcrumbs 17:30, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Adds is a present-tense verb, connoting current action. A photo with the history of WP use outlined above isn't "adding" anything to Wiki now. – Sca (talk) 13:49, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

You are misunderstanding the meaning of Adds. But well ok. The existence of such a criterion is news to me. If this project expects new photos or photos newly added to an article, it should or would be stated in WP:FP?. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 16:13, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sca's argument makes no sense and is definitely not Ok, it's like saying a hospital cannot benefit society today because the hospital was established 20 years ago. Bammesk (talk) 12:30, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No it's not like that. Suppose the hypothetical hospital still had exactly the same operating room and equipment as it had when it opened. Would it make sense to argue that said operating room suddenly adds great benefit to society? The Keitel photo's EV began when it was added to the articles. (And its weighty historical value aside, it's a poorly framed composition that can't be fixed.) – Sca (talk) 13:43, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is like that, because you wrote: "how does a photo (…) one that's been displayed in the target article (…) for at least eight years (…) now suddenly add significant EV? (…) A photo with the history of WP use outlined above isn't 'adding' anything to Wiki now." By the way, FP criteria doesn't say "suddenly adds". About "suppose": no there is no reason to suppose, the argument isn't about health care quality and operating rooms. If you want to elaborate, do it on your original argument. Bammesk (talk) 15:32, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose This is a very historically significant image, but it's just not a good photo. The top of Keitel's head is cut off, as is the bottom of his hat, and there's nothing which clearly puts the photo in context. If WP:VPC was still going, this would be a good candidate for that status. Nick-D (talk) 23:21, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:20, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The shadows just look wrong on it. I did some experiments, and discovered the only way to fix it is to pull the shadows way down. Which does, admittedly, look substantially better; the image is horribly faded. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 07:25, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I've uploaded over a fix. I guess I can Support the fix. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 07:28, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:55, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Salón Blanco (White Room), Casa Rosada, Buenos Aires, Argentina

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2019 at 11:15:27 (UTC)

Reason: Though not as a main picture of the article, it's one of the most important places within the building.
Articles in which this image appears: Casa_Rosada#Interior
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator: Gustavo Facci

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 11:15, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Used only in a gallery. Should really be mentioned in prose for full EV, it's, as you said, one of the most important places in the building. Also I think we should expect a higher resolution image of this subject to be FP. MER-C 17:23, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:26, 16 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

California State Capitol

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2019 at 14:42:08 (UTC)

Reason: Good EV and composition, high quality
Articles in which this image appears: California State Capitol, California
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Andre m

Support as nominator – Tomer T (talk) 14:42, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment – It's an OK 2014 pic. of a building, but I don't see anything really first-class about it. Meh. Sca (talk) 17:40, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, I'm not sure how this could be improved, it looks very high quality and great EV. Mattximus (talk) 21:31, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment looks over-exposed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:17, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I don't think it's overexposed — that would have blown out the sky and/or the details on the bride's dress. Good EV, high-quality capture, nice slice-of-life details. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:35, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 01:49, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:03, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support - Seems like a pretty good capture. I rather like the light for a straight-forward shot of this kind of subject. Nothing fancy, but we don't need fancy. Weak support because there's purple chromatic aberration in the trees that should be fixed. Weak support rather than neutral because it's not on the main subject and I feel like enwiki's FPC should be less pixel-peepery than Commons :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 04:18, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support per Rhododendrites. MER-C 17:17, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:21, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Sacramento,-California---State-Capitol.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:44, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nic Stone

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2019 at 13:00:58 (UTC)

Reason: A really nice image of a notable recently-launched author. One of the best from Rhododendrites's BookExpo photography of the last couple days. I was worried because of a couple distracting elements in the original photo, but they cropped right out with a really nice photo left behind.
Articles in which this image appears: Nic Stone
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator: Rhododendrites

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 13:00, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - --LLcentury (talk) 18:00, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 18:02, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Weak oppose - Distracting text in the background DannyS712 (talk) 00:25, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- One could relatively readily edit the top one out, but I worry that would be misleading. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 03:29, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Thanks for the nom, Adam. Still going through all the photos from this event! :) — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 01:54, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – sorry but I think there is a better picture of her in the article: This one, it doesn't meet the 1500px requirement but IMO is a better depiction of her. Somehow her expression in the nom image is a bit unusual (or perhaps uninteresting). I know it's a subjective thing but that's just my opinion. Bammesk (talk) 02:16, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
oppose as above - distracting text in the background. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:00, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. MER-C 10:05, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. Despite the distracting background in the image linked above by Bammesk, I think the author's expression in it is much better. She just looks bored here. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:51, 8 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per others.--Vulp here 12:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 14:37, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Rockwarbler

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2019 at 03:34:12 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image of a New South Wales endemic.
Articles in which this image appears: Rockwarbler
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 03:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 05:01, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Over-processed background. I am not in favour of the aggressive blurring of backgrounds. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:23, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- You're just making things up here. JJ Harrison (talk) 22:48, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - I apologise as I do not have experience with your camera set up. But grateful if you send me the out-of-camera image before any processing then I scan stop imagining things!. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:13, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
    - @Charlesjsharp and JJ Harrison: I hope you won't mind me butting in, but... you're both fantasic photographers, but each of you do things in a unique style. And I think that's causing a little conflict. You might want to just discuss your setups away from FPC, get to know the others' decisions, because your similar subjects but very different techniques seems to be causing a lot of confusion about what the other is doing. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 01:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
      - Thanks Adam. I have already made contact by e-mail, apologised, and asked to see unprocessed out-of-camerfa images so I can understand John's post-processing techniques. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:02, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I think the blur is just shallow DOF, not post-processing (the author will know). But I see a problem in the dark patch in the BG, it is very distracting. --Janke | Talk 10:59, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I don't mind the blurred background, the subject is in focus (apart from a bit of the tail), and sometimes the background distracts. Great EV. Mattximus (talk) 21:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support as per Mattximus --E.3 (talk) 01:36, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 01:03, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very fine! --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:37, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Origma solitaria 2 - Wattamolla.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:10, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Soft-plumaged Petrel

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2019 at 03:30:57 (UTC)

Reason: High quality image of small bird in flight at sea from a boat in swell. Photographing pterodromas is never easy - I got one crack at this as it passed the boat.
Articles in which this image appears: Soft-plumaged petrel
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: JJ Harrison

Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 03:30, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 05:04, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Over-processed sea. It appears that the sea has been blurred/aggressively noise-reduced. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:25, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Nonsense. It's just not taken with a crop body and a large aperture. The depth of field is about half of what it is with a 7D, 400 at 5.6 if you do the math. JJ Harrison (talk) 22:51, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - I apologise as I do not have experience with your camera set up. But grateful if you send me the out-of-camera image before any processing then I scan stop imagining things! Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:12, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I don't see the blurred background to be a significant problem. Much of it was likely out of the depth of field at f/4 anyway. MER-C 14:58, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
No. The sea would be in focus. But it's been blurred. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:26, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I also don't see the background blurred to be a problem, there is no EV for the background. Mattximus (talk) 21:36, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
It's not a matter of EV. It's clearly a matter of opinion how much one post-processes an image. With this amount of processing we are not judging a genuine wildlife photo. I'm not happy with that for encyclopaedic value. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:26, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I guess what I should have said is that the EV here is for the bird, not the water. The bird is in focus, so that's why I said it has high EV. Mattximus (talk) 22:30, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- You're making it very clear you have no experience with full frame cameras and big prime lenses. Much less noise and more subject isolation from the background is normal. JJ Harrison (talk) 22:51, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Fine capture. DoF looks normal for this sort of photo. I can see what looks like a little bit of pan-motion blur on the crest of the wave but I don't think it's problematic. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:44, 6 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:40, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:23, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Pterodroma mollis light morph - SE Tasmania 2019.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 06:07, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Sun

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2019 at 00:42:12 (UTC)

Reason: It is an image with great resolution, holds an outstanding EV.
Articles in which this image appears: Sun, Star, List of Solar System objects by size, etc.
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator: NASA/SDO (AIA), uploaded by Jaharwell

Support as nominator – The NMI User (talk) 00:42, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 01:15, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Previous nom from 2013. A previous FP appears to have been deleted due to copyright issues. --Paul_012 (talk) 20:50, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Vulp here 12:25, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 02:50, 15 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Obelisco (Obelisk), Buenos Aires, Argentina

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2019 at 21:16:39 (UTC)

**Original** – Obelisk of Buenos Aires, Argentina from above at night

Reason: Obelisk from street level during daytime, nice picture I think.
Articles in which this image appears: Obelisco de Buenos Aires
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others
Creator: Deensel (Flickr)

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 21:16, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Interesting shot, buit does not add much value to the article. 21:50, 4 June 2019 (UTC)
Comment want me to add the main picture? Regards. --LLcentury (talk) 21:54, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Opppose not a bad shot, but I think for encyclopedic value a shot taken at street level during the day would be better. Mattximus (talk) 22:00, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Please check it now. I've added the main article picture. --LLcentury (talk) 22:02, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose the new street-level replacement for the originally-nominated aerial photo. There is a huge amount of haloing around the obelisk from overprocessing, the clouds are weirdly varying colors, and it looks artificially oversaturated and undercontrasted. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:09, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per David Eppstein. Geoffroi (talk) 01:18, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose – Saturation? Perspective? Odd looking. – Sca (talk) 13:34, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Probably Speedy close at this point. At 22:00 last night, the nominator LLcentury replaced the image with a completely different one; so the first two votes and the last three relate to different pictures (of the same subject).
@LLcentury: please don't do this. If you want to nominate a different image, start a new nomination. (You can say on the original nomination that you're withdrawing it if you want to). Or, if it's a variant of the original image, you can add a second image labelled "Alt 1" or similar.

I think this nomination is now irretrievably messed up and it should just be closed; if anyone still wants to nominate either image they can start a new nomination. TSP (talk) 13:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
My apologies TSP, I didn't know that, please accept my profuse apologies.. Will not happen again, close it please. :) Very Kind Regards. --LLcentury (talk) 14:45, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 21:41, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Basilica of San Francisco el Grance, Madrid

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2019 at 12:12:09 (UTC)

Reason: A gorgeous depiction of the cupola of San Francisco el Grande
Articles in which this image appears: Basilica of San Francisco el Grande, Madrid
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator: Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:12, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support as nominator – Alvesgaspar (talk) 12:12, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 19:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Reflected light has washed out a lot of the fresco at the top of this image, and the asymmetric framing is a little odd. More is visible at File:Real Basílica de San Francisco el Grande. Cúpula.jpg although this one may have more-true colors. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:26, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support I'm not bothered by the framing. JJ Harrison (talk) 08:56, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:41, 13 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:40, 14 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ned Parfett

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2019 at 18:11:38 (UTC)

Reason: I have no idea of photography, but found this beautiful to be of 1912
Articles in which this image appears: Sinking of the RMS Titanic#Grief_and_outrage
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator: Unknown

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 18:11, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I hate to say this, but this is a modern colourisation: https://www.reddit.com/r/ColorizedHistory/comments/233ayl/titanic_sinks_on_april_15_1912_newspaper_boy_ned/ There's a non-colourised copy at https://www.sundaypost.com/fp/titanics-countdown-to-disasterafter-105-years-there-are-still-unanswered-questions-about-that-fateful-night/ that I'll grab. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 23:11, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment and Partially Done, changed picture friend, already done. Check it please. I removed marks and stains from the picture but there are still marks. Check it please. Thanks. --LLcentury (talk) 23:19, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I think this needs a little cleanup to be a realistic chance of being FP. MER-C 17:20, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:11, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nominations — to be closed

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

Older nominations requiring additional input from users

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:

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.
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:

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.
Add the image to:
- Template:Announcements/New featured content - newest on top, remove the oldest so that 15 are listed at all times.
- Wikipedia:Goings-on - newest on bottom.
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs - newest on top.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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}}.
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:

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

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:

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.
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.
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:

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.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
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:

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.
Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
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}}.
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.
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:

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.
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.
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.

Duomo Vecchio

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2019 at 09:31:32 (UTC)

Reason: Seen on Commons FPC last week, where it succeeded unanimously. Insanely high (medium format!) detail.
Articles in which this image appears: Old Cathedral, Brescia
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator: Wolfgang Moroder

Support as nominator – MER-C 09:31, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:14, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --LLcentury (talk) 11:35, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. Is it just me or has the perspective correction (or for all I know tilt-shift lens) been taken so far on this one as to make it look unnatural? —David Eppstein (talk) 19:05, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 08:56, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support per nom, excellent picture and EV. Mattximus (talk) 21:54, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support niiiiiice. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:24, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Duomo vecchio facciata Brescia.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 13:04, 12 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Don César de Bazan

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2019 at 19:33:31 (UTC)

Reason: A high-resolution scan of a poster from the opera's première always has a lot of encyclopedic value. The high artistry is a bonus.
Articles in which this image appears: Don César de Bazan +2
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: Célestin Nanteuil, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 19:33, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 20:32, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, awesome picture. Thanks for your previous aid by the way. --LLcentury (talk) 20:45, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. I guess the visible characters are as played by Jacques Bouhy and Célestine Galli-Marié? The resemblence to Galli-Marié seems clear enough, at least. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:52, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Generally speaking, that's true for most posters of this period. But I don't like to say so without a source. Gallica makes an attribution for File:Lucy Arbell in Massenet's Thérèse.jpg, for instance. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 23:30, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:14, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 15:44, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Always support Massenet. (Do I support the opera? I don't know - never heard it.) --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 17:25, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: I have a poster for abput 90% of his operas planned out or already done. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 19:38, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Adam Cuerden: Anything for Panurge, perchance? I've always been fond of the opening-night poster, given its peculiarities. And it's an odd little work, but not nearly as bad as its reputation leads one to expect. --Ser Amantio di Nicolao^{Che dicono a Signa?}_{Lo dicono a Signa.} 00:14, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Ser Amantio di Nicolao: File:Charles_Léandre_-_Jules_Massenet_-_Panurge.jpg It's still in progress. Jumping to Donizetti for an opera, though, as the one for La Navarraise is exhausting me. So much damage. So improperly stored. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.7% of all FPs} 13:51, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Célestin Nanteuil - Jules Massenet - Don César de Bazan.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 19:42, 11 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Frederick Fleet, Titanic crew and survivor

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2019 at 20:45:39 (UTC)

**Original** – Titanic lookout and survivor on controversial Boat #6 Frederick Fleet

Reason: First off, I am new to this section, I am trying to contribute and I apologise If I fail criteria. Second, sorry for my English. Third, I think it's a good picture which links to a well-sourced article.
Articles in which this image appears: Frederick Fleet
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator: Unknown

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 20:45, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, the picture was larger, I cropped to not be so much space behind him. Tell me if I need to crop it more or do what in case it's fit. --LLcentury (talk) 20:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment I don't see the purpose for cropping off the top of his head. The original is better. Geoffroi (talk) 23:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, Perfect friend, doing it again back, Best wishes and good luck. Done --LLcentury (talk) 23:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support, though we should remove the watermark. I'll get that later. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs}
Comment Adam Cuerden, Hi Adam!, If you do not wish to remove that, please explain me how to remove it. I barely noticed it LOL. Thanks. --LLcentury (talk) 13:36, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- I've got it, but basically, using GIMP, and the slightly fuzzy-edged circular brush at around 20 px, use the clone and healing brushes, matching colours and patterns as best you can. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 14:56, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 19:30, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Only a question, I put him under "Others", but he served for the UK in the two World Wars, should I put him in "military"? --LLcentury (talk) 19:45, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Only if he's notable for his military service in some way. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 21:31, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Support uncropped and un-watermarked version. —David Eppstein (talk) 21:54, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wow (talk) 23:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:16, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 15:46, 4 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:FrederickFleet.April1912.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 20:51, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delist: Grapsus grapsus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2019 at 14:47:58 (UTC)

Reason: To be replaced by File:Zayapa (Grapsus grapsus), Las Bachas, isla Santa Cruz, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-23, DD 30.jpg (see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Grapsus grapsus). This image is no longer used in the animal article.
Articles this image appears in: Minor usages, will be replaced if the other image is successful
Previous nomination/s: Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Red rock crab
Nominator: MER-C

Delist — MER-C 14:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Not a bad image, by any means. just not as good. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 16:26, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delist. They're both good images but there can be only one. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:54, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delist per above. Geoffroi (talk) 18:38, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Delist Agree they are both good, but there should be only 1. Mattximus (talk) 22:23, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Delisted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 16:06, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Blue-legged chameleon male

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2019 at 14:14:16 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. FP on Commons. Illustrates article well.
Articles in which this image appears: Calumma crypticum
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:14, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support What a stunning photo! Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 15:30, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 18:43, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - I don't like the red link in the caption; can it be created as a redirect? Regardless, its a great photo DannyS712 (talk) 23:20, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 09:48, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Blue-legged chameleon (Calumma crypticum) male Ranomafana.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:59, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Greylag goose head

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2019 at 14:07:35 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. FP on Commons. Adds value to article.
Articles in which this image appears: Greylag goose
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure if the head is distinctive enough to be significant in its own right here. The image is in the description section, but the only description of the head is that there is a "large head and bill. It has [...] an orange or pink bill with a white or brown nail (hard horny material at tip of upper mandible)" This may be one of those images that is rightfully an FP on Commons, but which doesn't add enough here, but it is an excellent image, so. .. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 15:36, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Thinking about it, I think the problem is A. the description doesn't describe other parts of the head, like the eyes, and B. the caption doesn't emphasise the points to note. I think this may be fixable. Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 16:12, 2 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose agree with above, I don't see the EV of the head specifically, the current lead image is far more informative. Mattximus (talk) 21:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Question Should I oppose this because the background is very blurry and therefore over-processed? JJ Harrison (talk) 22:53, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- No. The background blur is the natural consequence of using a long lens on a DSLR, rather than anything that happened in postprocessing. With a 400mm lens, even f/10 won't make the background sharp. —David Eppstein (talk) 19:18, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:57, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cheetah cub

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2019 at 13:58:22 (UTC)

Reason: High quality large image. FP on Commons. Adds value to a long article.
Articles in which this image appears: Cheetah
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator: Charlesjsharp

Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:58, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Lovely. Some parts concealed, but it helps show the camouflage, and a natural environment is never perfect (with the exception of your chameleons). Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 15:39, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 18:42, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. "Cheetah cubs are hidden in long grass when mother goes hunting"... makes me think of Pokemon. MER-C 09:50, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support --Wow (talk) 23:11, 1 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I will go against the grain here and oppose on the grounds that this will be the 5th (!!!) featured picture of a cheetah and I don't know what this one adds. Even though it is an excellent photograph. Mattximus (talk) 21:45, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I can only find 3 FPs - one FP of an adult female and two portraits, one of an adult and one of a cub. Mattximus. This nominated cub is in the wild. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:14, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

File:Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) female 2.jpg, File:Cheetah portrait Whipsnade Zoo.jpg, File:Cheetahs on the Edge (Director's Cut).ogv, File:Cheetah cub close-up edit2.jpg. I think we can afford to delist the fourth image. MER-C 10:09, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't counting the movie! Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:08, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Cheetah (Acinonyx jubatus) cub.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 15:55, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Le mage

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2019 at 04:13:43 (UTC)

Reason: A fine, high-quality image of a key scene in the opera (the finale)
Articles in which this image appears: Le mage, Alfredo Edel
FP category for this image: WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator: Alfredo Edel, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 04:13, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. —David Eppstein (talk) 04:26, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 09:16, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:35, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. MER-C 14:55, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support. --Gnosis (talk) 22:34, 3 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Alfredo Edel - Jules Massenet - Le mage.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:19, 10 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Grapsus grapsus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2019 at 17:14:17 (UTC)

Reason: To replace existing FP File:Grapsus grapsus Galapagos Islands.jpg if successful. This image has displaced the existing FP in the article and has higher resolution and detail.
Articles in which this image appears: Grapsus grapsus
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Crustaceans
Creator: Diego Delso

Support as nominator – MER-C 17:14, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Strong Support, what a beautiful picture. Best wishes. --LLcentury (talk) 17:19, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 23:37, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support if the other one is delisted, this one is indeed a better picture. Mattximus (talk) 02:47, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
See Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Grapsus grapsus. MER-C 14:49, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 10:07, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:35, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted File:Zayapa (Grapsus grapsus), Las Bachas, isla Santa Cruz, islas Galápagos, Ecuador, 2015-07-23, DD 30.jpg --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 18:57, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Anote Tong, former President of Kiribati

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2019 at 11:12:00 (UTC)

Reason: With my lack of experience here, I thought it complies with all or almost all requirements.
Articles in which this image appears: Anote Tong
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Sam Beebee (author), CropBot (bot which uploaded the picture.

Support as nominator – LLcentury (talk) 11:12, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
I wouldn't mind seeing some other possible crops as alternatives (seems a bit tight), but, on the whole, Support Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 12:58, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment, thanks for your participation, how would it be better cropped I have no idea on how doing that, Best wishes. --LLcentury (talk) 15:10, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. The background is a bit busy and the lighting too contrasty for my taste. —David Eppstein (talk) 17:51, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Comment User:David Eppstein Hi David!, and is that "fixable"? --LLcentury (talk) 18:00, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- The contrast can be adjusted, to a point, but the background and the squint in his eyes from the lighting cannot. And we're not asking here for the best version of this specific picture that can be attained, but for a picture that meets the standards for being featured. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:44, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose for the same reasons as David Eppstein. Geoffroi (talk) 23:40, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose per above. MER-C 14:54, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose good quality image, but the sharp shadow across half his face is distracting. Mattximus (talk) 21:43, 5 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 11:22, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Pauline Adams

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2019 at 03:12:17 (UTC)

Reason: The lead up to the USA's hundredth anniversary of women's suffrage continues with Pauline Adams. How about a suffragette who was arrested for protesting, got sentenced to 60 days - then appealed and won. And who, when suffrage passed, decided to qualify as a lawyer. And did? Image is quite nice for the time, and, if you compare the before with the after I'm pretty sure you'll be impressed. Think the shadow on the left is natural, so I've left it in, but reduced it a smidgen. Would have preferred if the cup wasn't cut off, but... not much I can do there without being certain of the cup's shape. Easy to think you know, then discover that you don't.
Articles in which this image appears: Pauline Adams
FP category for this image: Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator: Uncredited photographer, restored by Adam Cuerden

Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden ^(talk)_{Has about 6.6% of all FPs} 03:12, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- @Adam Cuerden: Prison/Jail cups are always made cheaply and simply. This photo is only missing the very top of the cup. No big deal. Geoffroi (talk) 23:47, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - EV outweighs composition here, I doubt that an equivalent image exists. MER-C 17:07, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support Geoffroi (talk) 23:42, 30 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Because of the cut-off cup it should struggle to be FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:37, 31 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
Support - Strong EV makes up for imperfections in the composition (it would not do, however, to illustrate an article about cups :) ). — Rhododendrites ^talk \\ 03:37, 7 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Not Promoted --Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust ^{The Homunculus} 09:30, 9 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Suspended nominations

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

@@ Line 10: / Line 10: @@
 -->
 <!-- Place new nominations at the TOP of the group. -->
+{{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Teatro Colón}}
 {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Marino Faliero}}
 {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Byun Yo-han}}