Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

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

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

Promoting an image

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

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

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-third 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).

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

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

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

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


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

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


Step 3:
Transclude and link

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

How to comment for Candidate Images

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

How to comment for Delist Images

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

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

Editing candidates

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

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

Gray contrast test image.svg
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Highlight test image.svg
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Colortest.png
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (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 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
Oustalet's chameleon (Furcifer oustaleti) male feeding Anja Community Reserve 1e.jpg Malagasy giant chameleon

Current nominations[edit]

L'Enfant et les sortilèges redux[edit]

Voting period ends on 1 Jun 2019 at 07:46:02 (UTC)

Reason
They're two of very few - possibly the only - free images for this work, and are rather good ones. Focus more on the sets than the scenes, but hint at most of the objects that come to life, save the animals in the garden. This was nominated once before, but fell into one of those weeks no-one was around. It passed on Commons by Rule of the 5th day, though, and, if anything, I'd have thought Commons would judge this much more harshly.
Articles in which this image appears
L'enfant et les sortilèges
FP category for this image
WP:FP/THEATRE
Creator
Anonymous, restored by User:Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 07:46, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support as before. Unfortunately, the crickets are still chirping. MER-C 16:20, 22 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 02:27, 23 May 2019 (UTC)



Stargazer snake eel[edit]

Voting period ends on 31 May 2019 at 20:00:05 (UTC)

Original – A stargazer snake eel
Reason
Currently doing well on Commons FPC, where support is unanimous.
Articles in which this image appears
Brachysomophis cirrocheilos
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish
Creator
Rickard Zerpe
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 20:00, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 21:05, 21 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Seems quite good for underwater photography. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 15:08, 22 May 2019 (UTC)



Ray Strachey[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 00:29:54 (UTC)

OriginalRay Strachey
Reason
A fine image of one of those people who can be quite hard to get good images of. British archives tend to be locked down a bit, so we're lucky to have such a fine picture of Strachey. She's a prominent British suffragette and, while she didn't win a parliamentary election (though she came somewhat close), she headed two or three major organisations, was the British representative to the Inter-Allied Women's Conference, and, plus, parliamentary secretary to Nancy Astor (first woman to take a seat in parliament) isn't bad.
Articles in which this image appears
Ray Strachey +1
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator
Anonymous photographer; restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 00:29, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 01:37, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. You can still see a lot of the texture of the paper on which this was printed (I think), above the normal film grain, but it's not an unpleasant effect and it would likely do too much damage to try to hide that. I wonder whether the negative is still accessible somewhere? —David Eppstein (talk) 03:01, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 09:46, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - Kaldari (talk) 01:44, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – Very nice period pic (pre-WWI) – strong character shows in her expression (though her article is perhaps a bit thin). – Sca (talk) 13:25, 21 May 2019 (UTC)



Malagasy giant chameleon[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 13:55:01 (UTC)

Reason
Impressive action sequence. Third image was a 2018 Commons POTY finalist.
Articles in which this image appears
Malagasy giant chameleon
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator
Charlesjsharp



Aletta Jacobs[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 06:50:05 (UTC)

OriginalAletta Jacobs, c.1900
Reason
Notable suffragette, and first woman to attend a university in the Netherlands, and at least amongst the first female physicians. Image is high-quality, and, while round may not be ideal, it's not bad at all. She's likely more notable in the Netherlands than the main Anglosphere, but diversity is a good thing.
Articles in which this image appears
Aletta Jacobs
FP category for this image
Either Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Political for the suffragette aspect, or Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/People/Science and engineering for the physician aspect
Creator
Max Büttinghausen (1847 - 1906); restored by Adam Cuerden. Researched by SusunW
  • Support – file description puts birth control first, not sure putting it first is a good idea, her article lists many other contributions. Bammesk (talk) 16:21, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – Since I asked Adam to work on a photo of her in the first place and it took me almost a year to find an image that would make a good candidate for restoration. In addition to her activism and medical practice in the Netherlands, Jacobs was an extremely important and influential international women's rights activist. Active in the leadership of the International Woman Suffrage Alliance and the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, as well as influential in the US contraception movement. Besides the archive of her records in the Netherlands, her library of personal books resides in the US. I am no expert of photography, but it appears to meet the FA criteria and is verifiable as being in the public domain. SusunW (talk) 22:05, 18 May 2019 (UTC)
@SusunW: You're welcome! It was an excellent find, and I was glad to help! Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 00:55, 19 May 2019 (UTC)



Basilica of Saint Peter in Rome[edit]

Voting period ends on 27 May 2019 at 14:13:35 (UTC)

Original – The front facade of Saint Peter's basilica in Rome, viewed from St. Peter's square
Reason
A very good quality and high resolution depiction of an iconic monument. Probably the best available image of the front facade of the building (see here)
Articles in which this image appears
St. Peter's Basilica, Baroque, Arch, Tourism in Italy, Western world
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Alvesgaspar
  • Support as nominatorAlvesgaspar (talk) 14:13, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Daniel Case (talk) 15:57, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. Although there are many other images of this subject, I agree with the nominator that this is the best view of this facade on commons, and as the lead image for the Basilica it has high EV. —David Eppstein (talk) 16:03, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support - nice detail. MER-C 16:09, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 20:31, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Wondering if the white balance is just a little blue? JJ Harrison (talk) 06:55, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • You may be right JJ Harrison, thank you. I concentrated in the near white building on the right, as a reference, and slightly adjusted the colour temperature. What do you suggest: to replace the picture or to propose a new version? -- Alvesgaspar (talk) 13:13, 20 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I'd probably just replace it - I don't think there would be any objections. JJ Harrison (talk) 04:00, 21 May 2019 (UTC)



Eastern chanting goshawk[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2019 at 16:03:41 (UTC)

Original – An Eastern chanting goshawk in Awash National Park, Ethiopia
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC last month, where it passed 15-1.
Articles in which this image appears
Eastern chanting goshawk, Melierax
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Charlesjsharp



Delist: Bufonaria perelegans[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2019 at 15:41:26 (UTC)

The shell of Bufonaria perelegans.
Reason
Not used in any articles because it has been replaced by a higher resolution image that contains more information. (The replacement isn't quite up to FP standards - it was a little overexposed, the edit made it worse to the point of blown highlights.)
Articles this image appears in
None.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Bufonaria perelegans
Nominator
MER-C
  • DelistMER-C 15:41, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • DelistBammesk (talk) 01:20, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Delist Although, really, voting hardly matters if it isn't used. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:41, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
    Well, there is the (in this case, very small) chance someone could find a use for the image or address some of the documentation concerns. MER-C 19:52, 16 May 2019 (UTC)



Thomas Mann Baynes phenakistiscope disc[edit]

Voting period ends on 25 May 2019 at 14:58:54 (UTC)

OriginalPhenakistiscope disc (animated). Running rats, Fantascope by Thomas Mann Baynes, 1833
Reason
High EV, interesting well-executed animation
Articles in which this image appears
Thomas Mann Baynes, Phenakistiscope
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Others
Creator
Thomas Mann Baynes, animated by Basile Morin
  • Support as nominatorTomer T (talk) 14:58, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – Annoying and IMO pointless. Sca (talk) 20:33, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support like this one but the whole disc here shows better the process. Historically important, 186 year-old work. Stone towards the invention of the cinematography -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:32, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – EV. Bammesk (talk) 01:19, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support As per Basile. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:41, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 01:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)



Coldstream Guards, Crimean War[edit]

Voting period ends on 24 May 2019 at 01:14:57 (UTC)

Original – Joseph Numa, John Potter, and James Deal of the Coldstream Guards just after their return from the Crimean War in 1856
Reason
Stumbled across this while checking out a new archive. I think it's a particularly nice bit of ephemera, good enough for Queen Victoria to get a personal negative of the image. This was briefly nominated before, but the discussion was kind of going way, way off topic, so I asked for it to be closed. It's since passed Commons (by rule of the 5th day, no less) albeit after a bit of a levels tweak which probably dealt with some issues that were derailing the last one.
Articles in which this image appears
Coldstream Guards, Facial hair in the military
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Military
Creator
Hughes & Mullins after Cundall & Howlett; restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:14, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 04:16, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support this time around as a high-EV illustration of outlandish 19th C. militaria. (Wish we could say with certainty that the tunics were red, though.) – Sca (talk) 14:05, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
    • They pretty much certainly were, but I don't think 19th century camera technology is perfect at that sort of fidelity. Chemical reactions are not the eye. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 16:09, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
      • Besides, all photographic plates at that time were only blue-sensitive, i.e. "color blind", rendering red as black, likewise other colors at the longer wavelength end of the spectrum. (For instance, the Swedish flag became a "negative" in old photos; the yellow cross rendered dark, the blue background light! That made it look like Finland's flag... ;-) Support, BTW. --Janke | Talk 19:46, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 20:51, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
In any case, it's an arresting pictorial artifact. Can you imagine engaging in combat wearing one of those crazy bearskin 'hats' – ?? Well, the whole Crimean War was pretty crazy anyway. Sca (talk) 21:36, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support, but the caption and image description should specify who's where, I think it's from left to right.Brandmeistertalk 17:46, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
Unless you're Chinese, or maybe Jewish? – Sca (talk) 20:35, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
But... the names are on the image if there's any doubt. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:28, 19 May 2019 (UTC)



Nominations — to be closed[edit]

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

Older nominations requiring additional input from users[edit]

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

Closing procedure[edit]

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

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.

When promoted, perform the following:

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

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the 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.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Delist closing procedure[edit]

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

If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

  1. Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
  2. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  3. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

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

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.

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

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
    • Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
  4. Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
  5. Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.

Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:

  1. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  2. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the appropriate section of the archive.
  3. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Recently closed nominations[edit]

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

Bill Hosokawa's home at the Heart Mountain Relocation Center [edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 22 May 2019 at 01:04:23 (UTC)

OriginalBill Hosokawa's home at the Heart Mountain Relocation Center, part of the internment of Japanese Americans during WWII. On the right is Julena Steinheider, then a mathematics teacher at the concentration camp, later a notable astronomer.
Reason
It says a lot about the situation. Note the poor construction, the attempt at domestic life, the notable victim...
Articles in which this image appears
Bill Hosokawa, Julena Steinheider, Heart Mountain Relocation Center, in no particular order.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
Creator
Department of the Interior. War Relocation Authority; restored by Adam Cuerden
  • Support as co-nominatorAdam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 01:04, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support as co-nominatorDavid Eppstein (talk) 01:19, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • There's a couple of white spots on the wall - far right, near the center. Also, is it just me, the shoddy construction or is the image tilted? MER-C 14:39, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • There is tilt but I think there is also a lot of lens distortion (not a high quality lens). This being a historic image or documentary, I am Ok with it as is, rather than modifying it for technical reasons (which would mean cropping the boundary). Support. Bammesk (talk) 17:18, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
Given the lamp, which presumably hangs mostly straight from the ceiling, I'm inclined to think there isn't as much tilt as you'd think. Certainly some lens distortion, though possibly exacerbated by a small room requiring a wide angle lens. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Cuerden (talkcontribs)
I am somewhat concerned that the tilt and lens distortion detracts from the EV - it can be confused with the floor not being level in reality. MER-C 16:33, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
Not much that can be done, though, and the light fixture kind of hints to me that the image is less tilted than you'd think, as the wood beam next to it is tilted relative to it. The buildings were demolished after WWII. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 16:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 04:20, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support rectified version that I just uploaded. Revert if you don't like it - but note that very little of the edges were lost in the fix. --Janke | Talk 23:01, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
    • I can live with that. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 23:18, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
    • Also ok with me. If it were my own photo I would have done that as a matter of course, and I don't think the sloppiness of the original framing has much EV in itself. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:52, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support now that my concerns have been addressed. MER-C 14:19, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment@Janke: the file size is reduced too much (now 570KB, it was 2.31MB), could you upload a larger file? Bammesk (talk) 01:47, 17 May 2019 (UTC)
To be fair, I save at 99/100 on the JPEG quality scale - above Photoshop's highest setting. I would prefer to have it done from the PNG version and uploaded as PNG as well, but my JPEGs are at the "ridiculous" level. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 02:08, 17 May 2019 (UTC)

Promoted File:Heart Mountain Relocation Center, Heart Mountain, Wyoming. In his barracks home at Block 7 - 21 - NARA - 539206 - Restoration.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:45, 22 May 2019 (UTC)



Carlotta 2018-06-18 1725Z[edit]

Voting period ends on 29 May 2019 at 04:08:39 (UTC)

Original – Tropical Depression Carlotta weakening off the southern coast of Mexico on June 18.
Reason
This satellite image shows the structure of the weakening Carlotta and its location better than any text could describe (without going into unnecessary detail). In my opinion, the image is of high enough quality to meet the criteria. The coastline may be removed upon request if that is necessary.
Articles in which this image appears
Tropical Storm Carlotta (2018)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Weather
Creator
Satellite image from NASA's worldview; uploaded to commons by Hurricane Noah
  • Support as nominatorNoahTalk 04:08, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Question - You state yourself as the creator. Could you walk us through that? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 04:54, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    @Adam Cuerden: I said it was from NASA's worldview and uploaded by myself. NoahTalk 04:56, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    Okay... I see the confusion. I meant it was uploaded to commons by myself. NoahTalk 05:05, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
    Thank you! Sorry about that: Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 05:07, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose - sorry to do it, but the image barely seems to be of anything. Sure, it’s Carlotta weakening, but visually it isn’t impressive. Hurricanehink mobile (talk) 12:51, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Withdraw @Hurricanehink: I guess TD and TS images aren't really deserving of featured status as they aren't doing much to begin with. Although I nominated this on the line of it being more informative of its location and structure than it being visually impressive. NoahTalk 13:05, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:03, 21 May 2019 (UTC)



Replace: Oedipus and the Sphinx[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 09:41:15 (UTC)

Proposed replacement
Reason
Superseded by official museum reproduction. While the pixel count is smaller, the level of detail is about the same and the colors are now authoritative.
Articles this image appears in
Oedipus and the Sphinx etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/On the Island of Dr Moreau
Nominator
MER-C
  • ReplaceMER-C 09:41, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Why is the proposed remplacement so much darker? It is also smaller. Yann (talk) 13:12, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
    This is the image that is currently available at the museum website and is more recent than the existing FP. As to your questions, I don't know. MER-C 16:24, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace First looks like the typica result from auto-levels on a darker image. Replacement is more authorative. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 17:03, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • ReplaceBammesk (talk) 15:57, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace - Per nom. Mattximus (talk) 00:54, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Replace. I think we have to go with the authoritative colors over something that appears prettier but may not match the artist's intent or execution. —David Eppstein (talk) 01:18, 19 May 2019 (UTC)

Replaced with File:Oedipus and the Sphinx MET DP-14201-023.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:55, 21 May 2019 (UTC)



Heteropoda venatoria[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 18:43:18 (UTC)

Original – A male giant crab spider
Alt 1 Trying a crop
Reason
Nice detail, high resolution. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Heteropoda venatoria
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Arachnids
Creator
Jkadavoor
  • Support either as nominatorMER-C 18:43, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support either, with hesitations A lot of JPEG artefacting, mitigated by the size of the image. The leaves, in particular, have enough that it almost imitates a film grain. Still, it's very high resolution, and the problems are only visible near 100% zoom, so I'm happy to support. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 02:22, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I'm a bit skeptical of the centered composition and small size of subject with respect to background. Is this eye-catching enough? —David Eppstein (talk) 17:54, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Isn't this at least a stop underexposed? JJ Harrison (talk) 06:50, 20 May 2019 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 02:51, 21 May 2019 (UTC)



Christina Nilsson[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 May 2019 at 17:01:23 (UTC)

OriginalChristina Nilsson, leading operatic soprano of her day, who sang at the Metropolitan Opera's first performance, amongst other notable opera houses.
Reason
Another of Jebulon's fine restorations, of a notable historic operatic soprano.
Articles in which this image appears
Christina Nilsson
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
Nadar, restored by Jebulon

Promoted File:Christine Nilsson Nadar.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 02:49, 21 May 2019 (UTC)



Germaine de Staël[edit]

Voting period ends on 28 May 2019 at 16:29:21 (UTC)

OriginalGermaine de Staël
Reason
A high-quality painting of a highly notable woman
Articles in which this image appears
Germaine de Staël +1
FP category for this image
You could argue a few, but let's say Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator
Marie-Éléonore Godefroid, after François Gérard

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:45, 19 May 2019 (UTC)



Apollo 11 launch (Saturn V rocket)[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 May 2019 at 05:21:42 (UTC)

Original – The Apollo 11 Saturn V rocket lifting off at 13:32 UTC on 16 July 1969 from Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39A.
Reason
High EV. Shows full view of the Saturn V rocket during launch of Apollo 11. Note that we have a FP of another view: File:Apollo 11 Launch2.jpg. We also have non-FP from a "second" before at File:Apollo 11 Launch - GPN-2000-000630.jpg.
Articles in which this image appears
Apollo 11, Apollo program, History of aviation, Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39, + Template:Saturn rockets
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
Creator
Dodo and TheDJ
  • Support as nominator – --- Coffeeandcrumbs 05:21, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment What's the point to have 2 FPs taken seconds apart? Saturation is much increased compared to the other image, and may be a bit tilted, but it is quite cleaner. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:43, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
    • No, no. I think you misunderstood. The one a second before is not FP at this time. I just included it in case people prefer it. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 08:48, 8 May 2019 (UTC)
    • @Yann: There is no FP that shows a full view of this rocket launching. There is only this from a completely different angle.--- Coffeeandcrumbs 12:32, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 13:09, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 19:27, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment – leaning to oppose, too saturated (sky doesn't look good). This is a better photo: File:Apollo 11 Launch - GPN-2000-000630.jpg if restored. Bammesk (talk) 16:07, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
    • Bammesk, at Commons, PawełMM was kind enough to restore that image for us. I would be happy with either photo being promoted. --- Coffeeandcrumbs 10:15, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
    • @Bammesk: It's worth noting that, given the incredible brightness of the rocket exhaust, as well as speed, this would have been a very fast exposure. The sky is severely under-exposed, which (combined with what I believe is filmstock's natural bias towards blue) ups its apparent saturation quite a bit. It's somewhat to be expected. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 05:13, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
  • I also like the restored image better, but it is currently unused on en. —David Eppstein (talk) 00:38, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:13, 18 May 2019 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 11:13, 18 May 2019 (UTC)


Lolotte and Werther by Eunice Pinney[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 04:10:24 (UTC)

OriginalLolotte and Werther, an 1810 watercolor by Eunice Pinney. Currently owned by the National Gallery of Art, to which it was donated by Edgar and Bernice Garbisch.
Reason
Interesting work by an interesting woman. Eunice Pinney was one of the first American artists to work in the medium of watercolor. This is fairly typical of her work - a shade more elaborate, perhaps than some of her others, but not by much. It'd be nice to get some American folk art on the front page, also.
Articles in which this image appears
Eunice Pinney
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Eunice Pinney, digitized by the National Gallery of Art
@Adam Cuerden: Possibly - I'd given it some thought. I may throw it in there tomorrow, although there are better options for it. Speaking of...I may have found her source...or something based on her source, at least. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:24, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
That article I linked mentions her source: "Lolotte et Werther depicts a scenefrom Goethe's popular novel The Sorrows of Young Werther, for which Pinney apparently relied on an engraving (or some derivation thereof) by French artist F. Bonnefoy." That kind of thing was pretty common at the time, and probably more so in folk art. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 04:29, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
Oh, absolutely. Still is with a lot of folk artists, only they've replaced engravings with movies and TV shows. Henry Darger, for example. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 04:39, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
I thought Darger used illustrations and cut them up into collages? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 05:45, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
If memory serves (and it may not, it's been a while since I've read about him), he did, but he also traced images from advertising and used them as the basis for some of his figures. I think he may have developed an enlarger tool to aid himself in the process as well. Another example (I'd have cited him earlier, but I didn't believe there was an article): Justin McCarthy. --Ser Amantio di NicolaoChe dicono a Signa?Lo dicono a Signa. 07:53, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 18:25, 10 May 2019 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 16:09, 11 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. High-quality reproduction of work by a notable artist, used as the lead image for her article. Among the works we have by the artist, this is a good choice to feature, both because of the execution of the work itself (the falling skater in the picture-in-picture!) and because of the quality of the image as a reproduction (high resolution, very sharp, with no unnecessary matting). —David Eppstein (talk) 05:15, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment: She has been referred to as a notable artist, but her page receives an average of 1 view per day. We may wish her to be notable, but apparently in the grand scheme, she isn't. - HappyWaldo (talk) 23:05, 12 May 2019 (UTC)
    • Honestly, page views are a bad way to judge notability. It gets way too much recentism into the mix. Especially as POTD is as much educational as celebratory. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:57, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
      • I understand your points, but this artist is really beyond the margins in art historical terms, and still a virtual unknown in an age of intense revisionism in favour of women artists. - HappyWaldo (talk) 12:46, 13 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Geoffroi (talk) 04:24, 13 May 2019 (UTC)

Promoted File:Lolotte and Werther by Eunice Pinney.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:39, 17 May 2019 (UTC)



Einstein Cross[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 May 2019 at 09:16:35 (UTC)

Original – The photograph shows four images of a very distant quasar which has been multiple-imaged by a relatively nearby galaxy acting as a gravitational lens. The angular separation between the upper and lower images is 1.6 arcseconds.
Reason
Good EV
Articles in which this image appears
Einstein Cross + 5 others.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Understanding or Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
NASA, ESA, and STScI, uploaded by Tryphon
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 09:16, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose - This one [[2]] is a lot more pleasing to the eye, and you can actually see the shape of the galaxy. --Janke | Talk 16:52, 7 May 2019 (UTC)
  • Support Important for what it is. I do agree the other is likely better, though. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.6% of all FPs 19:42, 11 May 2019 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:38, 17 May 2019 (UTC)



Javan slow loris[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 May 2019 at 16:42:34 (UTC)

Original – A Javan slow loris
Reason
Was seen on Commons FPC last week, where it succeeded unanimously. While the photo does have shortcomings, particularly around the background and the blown highlights on the head, they are relatively insubstantial considering the species is critically endangered.
Articles in which this image appears
Javan slow loris
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Aprisonsan

Promoted File:Coucang.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:34, 16 May 2019 (UTC)



Suspended nominations[edit]

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

Jacinda Ardern after the Christchurch mosque shootings[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2019 at 16:28:48 (UTC)

Reason
Huge encyclopedic value. The extent of the photo's significance to the events has even been written about in e.g. The Guardian and The Sydney Morning Herald. Seems like a good example of EV outweighing some elements on the technical side that would typically prevent an image from being promoted. See also the Signpost.
Articles in which this image appears
Christchurch mosque shootings, Jacinda Ardern
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People
Creator
Kirk Hargreaves, uploaded by Giantflightlessbirds
  • Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Conditional support provided that the OTRS permission is verified. Photo has become notable in its own right. MER-C 17:40, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
I agree that we should wait until the OTRS is cleared. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose Very poor image of an important event. There are dozens of better ones around. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
  • Support. This is a case of the picture of itself being an item of interest - and this is partially because of the technical imperfections. The nominator's claim of high EV holds up. --LukeSurl t c 08:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Comment Oppose – This depicts an emotionally charged recent event, and the image captures that. However, I wonder how much the original image was manipulated for effect – the hands for instance. Color? Saturation? In other words, is this a picture of how things really were? – Sca (talk) 15:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
PS: Keep in mind, Ms. Adern is a currently sitting politician. – Sca (talk) 15:13, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
I certainly hear your concern, but I would argue (as others have) that the EV of the image outweighs those technical concerns. However, if you still have outstanding issues, what solution would you propose? Cwilson97 (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2019
From the Guardian and Sydney Morning Herald stories above we have a pretty detailed account of how the image was taken. "The photo, which first appeared on a city council Twitter feed, appeared as taken with barely any touch-ups or editing." —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
So you are opposing because of ... a feeling of wondering if something is manipulated? The hands in particular? What evidence do you have for this (and/or that the accounts in the publications are lying/misleading)? Are you saying the hands are copied in? Or just that the saturation was changed (as it has been for many or even most FPs, to some degree). Oppose because you think the technical specs are more important than the broad press coverage this has received reporting on the significance of the photo to the events, or because they're wrong, but not because of some hunch of bad faith on the part of the photographer or some allusion to [over-?]post-processing. There are plenty of valid reasons to oppose this one -- it's the quality is not typical of FPs, after all -- but this one I don't get. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Oppose, the picture does not really describe either of the main topics, but is tangentially related to both, so I do not see strong EV for this artistic photograph. Mattximus (talk) 20:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Not sure how the photo of Jacinda Ardern in one of her most important public appearances is only tangentially related to Jacinda Ardern. And the feeling here in NZ is that photo is absolutely an important part of the mosque shootings aftermath. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 20:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Through a window blurred with reflections? Mattximus (talk) 00:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Yes. What does the technical quality have to do with whether it's an important photo or not? Have you read the linked articles about the photo? —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 01:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Support I don't get it, but the evidence convinces me this image is iconic of the event. I suspect, if it doesn't pass, coming back in a month with evidence of its enduring importance will make it pass. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Support – there are sufficient sources on the photo itself that it would be notable even in the absence of the surrounding context, which I think suggests sufficient EV; it's great to have a notable news photo available to Wikipedia straight after the event. TSP (talk) 11:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Support per nom --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
  • What about the OTRS permission? Do you have the ticket number? Regards, Yann (talk) 21:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak support, but could we perhaps hold off promoting until permission is confirmed with OTRS? I am definitely excited that we have an image that has been so widely commented upon, but I think the EV could be better grounded if one or both of the articles discussed the photograph, even if it's only a line or two - hence the "weak". Josh Milburn (talk) 13:46, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
    • I'd DEFINITELY support suspending this until OTRS clears, but only after the voting period is over. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 16:57, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
      • Agree, Conditional support pending OTRS permission, I added some details to the image caption in her article. Bammesk (talk) 19:51, 7 April 2019 (UTC)
  • I'll suspend this nomination, for a maximum of two months, until OTRS permission is confirmed. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:08, 10 April 2019 (UTC)
  • @Giantflightlessbirds: Do you have any additional information about the OTRS status? If you were involved in the email to permissions, perhaps you've seen the ticket# that we can get someone to check on? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:13, 19 April 2019 (UTC)
For the record, OTRS seems really backlogged. If no problems have arisen in the two months, I'm happy to promote this, instead of junking the FP status. I think it has enough supports for that to happen? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 22:39, 14 May 2019 (UTC)
There's no reason why we shouldn't wait the backlog out. That said, I posted an inquiry on the Commons OTRS noticeboard. MER-C 16:15, 15 May 2019 (UTC)
"maximum of two months" Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 02:35, 16 May 2019 (UTC)
Adam Cuerden I can leave this in the suspended section longer, but currently without the conditional supports this isn't succeeding. (5,5 support and 3 opposes = 64%). Armbrust The Homunculus 09:53, 19 May 2019 (UTC)
Why is this picture seriously considered for promotion when half of her face is covered by weird lens glare. This photo has meh EV at best, and is intended for "artistic" purpose. I have a hard time believing that an editor with enough interest could not get permission for something like this that is way more visual without appealing to "artistic" artifices. 71.197.186.255 (talk) 06:32, 23 May 2019 (UTC)