निर्वाचित चित्र उम्मीदवार वो चित्र (छवियाँ) हैं जिनके कॉमन्स पर सर्वोत्तम चित्रों में से एक होने के लिए समुदाय के लोग मतदान करेंगे। यह सूची उन उम्मीदवारों की है जो निर्वाचित चित्र हो सकते हैं। आज का चित्र निर्वाचित्र चित्रों में से चुनी हुई एक छवि होगी।
यदि आपको लगता है कि आपने एक महत्वपूर्ण चित्र प्राप्त अथवा निर्मित किया है जो उपयुक्त चित्र विवरण और मुद्राधिकार के साथ है, तब निम्न कार्य करें।
प्रथम चरण: चित्र का नाम निम्न खाने में उपस्थित पाठ के आगे लिखें, उदाहरण के लिए, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:आपके चित्र का नाम.jpg लिखें और "नया नामांकन आरम्भ करें।" बटन पर क्लिक करें।
सभी एकल फाइलें:
पुनः नामांकन के लिए चित्र के नाम 'के बाद केवल /2 लिखें। जैसे:– Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2
Set nominations ONLY
Sets are temporarily disallowed for technical reasons; will reopen soon.
द्वितीय चरण: आप जिस पृष्ठ पर पहुँचे हैं वहाँ के निर्देशों का पालन करें और पृष्ठ को संरक्षित करें।
वो सम्पादक जिनका खाता कम से कम १० दिन पुराना है और ५० सम्पादन कर चुके हैं, अपना मत दे सकते हैं। अपने नामांकन के लिए कोई भी मतदान कर सकता है। अज्ञात (आईपी) मतों की अनुमति नहीं है।
आप निम्न साँचे काम में ले सकते हो:
{{Support}} (Support),
{{Oppose}} (Oppose),
{{Neutral}} (Neutral),
{{Comment}} (Comment),
{{Info}} (Info),
{{Question}} (Question),
{{Request}} (Request).
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator.
Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2024 at 09:52:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Un pecheur rentre au port au lever du jour à kerkennah - vue large - tunisie.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Un pecheur rentre au port au lever du jour à kerkennah - vue large - tunisie.jpg
Voting period ends on 15 Jun 2024 at 03:53:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Portale della Chiesa di San Michele.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Portale della Chiesa di San Michele.jpg
Weak oppose While I see this photo as a superior to full scale chapel (if you can't step further from the object — shoot the details), this picture is lacking wow and is blurred on the top. Maybe a QI but not a FP IMO, sorry. Красныйwanna talk?09:20, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Weak support In macro photography Sebring12Hrs if you don't stack images with different depths of field you can't have all the animal in focus especially if it is not parallel to the lens. The photo was taken at f13, he couldn't do better--El Golli Mohamed (talk) 10:08, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment You don't have as big a depth of field as you do with focus-stacking though this was not taken with a macro lens. The depth of field is worse if you get in too close. Naturally, an animal in profile will have more of its body in focus than this sort of threequarter view, but Orthoptera legs and Tettigoniidae antennae are very tricky. There is seldom a reason to crop off part of an animal unless the objective is a close up. In this case a tighter crop just to show the head would make it look better, but the head isn't especially sharp so it might not be worth it. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:51, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose The animal was cut (leg and antenna), additionally the problem of depth of field, here you can see an image of a similar subject in focus and not cut --Wilfredor (talk) 12:15, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2024 at 11:45:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:004 Sunrise at Serengeti National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:004 Sunrise at Serengeti National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg
Thank you for your message. The focus was at infinity. The house on the hill for example seems in clear focus to me. Maybe because of the huge resolution of the file it was still rendering when you zoomed in? -- Giles Laurent (talk) 19:39, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support Very atmospheric. The mountain and also most of the trees on the plain are in focus. I guess the impression of softness is just due to some haze which may be inevitable at these distances. – Aristeas (talk) 06:58, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Cute cats, but sorry, the image has a number of issues in addition to the DoF that Wilfredor pointed out. The colors are quite oversaturated and most of the greens have maximum saturation. The left cat is supposed to be in focus but is not very sharp and seems to have been aggressively sharpened in post. Domestic cats are extremely commonly photographed animals so the bar for an outstanding photo is very high in my opinion. dllu(t,c)03:33, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Info The image quality is significantly worse than existing FP File:Mount Rushmore detail view.jpg. It is only a tenth of the resolution in each dimension not to mention worse dynamic range and detail. (Original nomination)
Keep This wouldn't be promoted now, after someone has uploaded a 600 megapixel behemoth view of the same subject, but on its own it doesn't fall short enough of FPC standards to need delisting. It's not like this is is VIC, where there can only be one image per subject. — Rhododendritestalk | 20:27, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Even though the pictures portraits the same subject almost from the same placement, light and colors are slightly different. I agree with to others to keep both as FP, too. --Harlock81 (talk) 11:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2024 at 11:51:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:ECB at sunrise, Frankfurt am Main (IMG 20220427 071600-RR).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:ECB at sunrise, Frankfurt am Main (IMG 20220427 071600-RR).jpg
Oppose Very low resolution by modern standards especially for an architectural subject; and the composition could be better in my opinion. For example, the way a lamp post in the foreground is occluding one of the main pylons of the bridge. dllu(t,c)17:18, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose technically a good shot, but not outstanding to me. Especially the shadow in the background doesn't help. --MB-one (talk) 11:55, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment We often say that images are “nominated for delisting” and AFAICR apply the “only two nominations” limit also to delist nominations. However I would be happy to learn that I am wrong.
Asking some users which were especially interested in rule discussions in the past – @A.Savin, Basile Morin, Charlesjsharp, Rhododendrites, W.carter – and everybody else with FPC experience: Would you say that the “only two active nominations by the same user” limit applies also to delist nominations (as I have assumed here) or would you say that one can nominate as many images for delisting as one wants?
I would argue that the limit should also apply to delist nominations.
Formal argument: the rules say “The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period”, so if not stated differently the two nominations limit should also apply to delist nominations.
Material argument: In past discussions the limit has often been justified by emphasizing (1) that nominations must be discussed carefully (we want quality, not quantity); and (2) that the FP maintenance resources are very limited. IMHO both points apply even a fortiori to delist nominations: (1) they certainly need an especially careful discussion (we all want to avoid arbitrary delisting) and (2) they mean even more work for us maintainers than normal nominations – delisting a FP always requires misc. manual edits.
As I recall we've had a few discussions about how many delists should be allowed and always come back to the "Delists are the same as normal nominations". Mostly for the reasons that people have such mixed feelings about having delists at all, and that there is so much work in closing them and only a few users know how to do it properly, since it's all done manually.
But since this question pops up from time to time, perhaps we should add a word or two to the rules to clarify this. Such discussions belong on the FPC talk page, not on a nom since it requires input from the community. I suggest you copy these comments to that page and let the discussion continue there. --Cart(talk)07:53, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Reading more carefully, the two-delist-rule is written in the delist rules: "There is a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.". Admittedly the sentence could be placed better (see FPC talk page), but this is a clear {{FPD}}. --Cart(talk)11:07, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed.
Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2024 at 00:31:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Photograph of Gustave Doré by Nadar, between 1856 and 1858.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Photograph of Gustave Doré by Nadar, between 1856 and 1858.jpg
Question I get that the noise is authentic to the source photograph, but wouldn't it be even better to remove it digitally? --MB-one (talk) 11:59, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Nomination denied. Thank you for nominating this image. Unfortunately, it does not fall within the Guidelines because only two active nominations per user are allowed. – Aristeas (talk) 07:01, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not one of the rarest birds, though amazing to get a photograph; but so tricky to ignore serious technical shortcomings. I much prefer several of the other images on Commons. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:48, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2024 at 12:04:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:060 Olive baboon walking at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:060 Olive baboon walking at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg
Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2024 at 05:33:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Close wing Mud puddling position of Cethosia biblis (Drury,1773) - Red Lacewing.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Close wing Mud puddling position of Cethosia biblis (Drury,1773) - Red Lacewing.jpg
Info Ecocathedral in Mildam municipality of Heerenveen, Part of surplus building material stacked in a special way. (This is a special project that will continue until the year 3000). All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 04:13, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose interesting subject and technically a good shot. But the composition and contrast is not FP worthy to me. --MB-one (talk) 12:08, 4 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 19:32:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Arabian shepherd selling sheep in Ramadan month (street of Marrakesh).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Arabian shepherd selling sheep in Ramadan month (street of Marrakesh).jpg
Info Lonely Arabian shepherd selling sheep in Ramadan month (street of Marrakesh, far from souk). My shot. --Mile (talk) 19:32, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 18:47:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Balzender-Blauer-Pfau-Zoo-Duisburg-2024.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Balzender-Blauer-Pfau-Zoo-Duisburg-2024.jpg
Oppose Sorry, insufficient compositional quality for a common animal. Part of the organism is obscured and the background is busy. dllu(t,c)22:09, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 18:38:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Zebramanguste-Mungos-Mungo-Zoo-Duisburg-2024.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Zebramanguste-Mungos-Mungo-Zoo-Duisburg-2024.jpg
Weak support Correct focus with acceptable DoF, nice composition and the subject is well lit, but I find the bright spot top left a little distracting. BigDom (talk) 02:14, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 15:32:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Beaumont - moulin banal et tour Salamandre - 2024-05-11 - 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Beaumont - moulin banal et tour Salamandre - 2024-05-11 - 01.jpg
Oppose Pleasant composition with nice light but IMO not outstanding shot. Maybe a lower point of view with more road and less sky would work better. --Podzemnik (talk) 02:18, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 14:27:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Vellereille-les-Brayeux - Abbaye de Bonne-Espérance - vue depuis la cour d'honneur - 2023-09-23 - 01.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Vellereille-les-Brayeux - Abbaye de Bonne-Espérance - vue depuis la cour d'honneur - 2023-09-23 - 01.jpg
Oppose Nice quality but the light is quite ordinary. Dark trees with the right wing in the shade makes the photo looks unbalanced - too bright on the left, too dark on the right. --Podzemnik (talk) 02:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 13:29:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Bluebells in the Brooklyn Botanic Garden (42915p).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bluebells in the Brooklyn Botanic Garden (42915p).jpg
Info Bluebells (Hyacinthoides non-scripta) - pretty park scene at the botanical garden. I looked up the origin of that odd "non-scripta" name. It's a mythology reference. When Hyacinthus was accidentally killed, a flower grew from his blood and Apollo's tears marked the letters AIAI on the petals. Basically this is saying "not the kind of hyacinth that has letters on it". all by — Rhododendritestalk | 13:29, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 13:07:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Jun Takahashi dress for Undercover (51492).jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Jun Takahashi dress for Undercover (51492).jpg
Info Jun Takahashi dress for Undercover, spring/summer 2024. Featured in the Metropolitan Museum of Art exhibition "Sleeping Beauties: Reawakening Fashion". A different version of this dress got some attention when it was worn to this year's Met Gala. all by — Rhododendritestalk | 13:07, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2024 at 09:10:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Corvus corax in puddle at Bonny Doon Beach.jpg/2Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Corvus corax in puddle at Bonny Doon Beach.jpg/2
Comment Sorry you didn't get feedback on the last one. Once in a while we'll see a photo that isn't quite up to anyone's standards for Featured Picture, but also isn't particularly bad enough to oppose. An all-black subject is very difficult to photograph, and while you've done a pretty good job here, the level of detail just isn't up to what people expect for birds at FPC. From looking at the ground, it looks like the focus might be just slightly past the bird. A smaller focus window and faster shutter might help. Some people might find the background a little off-putting, too (there's a lot of personal preference involved here). So in short I think you have a good photo that could be helpful to illustrate a common raven, but it's probably not going to work for Featured Picture. — Rhododendritestalk | 13:45, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose I don't see an outstanding photo - quality, composition, and light are all good but not FP good to me. The left tight crop makes the photo look unbalanced. --Podzemnik (talk) 02:23, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2024 at 15:55:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:William Shakespeare by John Taylor, edited.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:William Shakespeare by John Taylor, edited.jpg
This is a historical painting, so we usually do not edit it. This one is more than 400 years old, so the cracks are a normal feature in this case. Yann (talk) 19:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Not a good file name per Commons guidelines. Please think of such things before you create nominations. Something like "Woman with rainbow-hued body makeup" would be better. Plus the description is inadequate, I'll fix that one for you. --Cart(talk)09:46, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
No urgency per se, but people may be more inclined to support the nom if everything is top notch for it, plus nominators tend to forget such "minor" things once they've got their star. --Cart(talk)18:23, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose This image is technically fine, but I don't like the left-leaning nature of the subject. A centered subject is preferable, and a more expressive face is desirable. Overall, not FP in my eyes. WolverineXI10:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your review, Wolverine XI. As far as I know, this kind of image composition is often used in documentaries to create suspense and attention. The usual harmonious placement on the right would be the less conspicuous standard. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:35, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Much better thank you! There seems to still be a blurry area close to her right shoulder (so the shoulder that appears on left on the image). There is also a blurry area close to the thumb and close to the other hand. Also, I'm wondering, is it over a table that she's placing her arms or is just a soft surface? Because it is a bit strange how the sort of white table is extremely linear just bellow the body but on the left it becomes a bit wavy (so I think it's a soft surface but that there was a white rectangle applied in postproduction bellow the body) -- Giles Laurent (talk) 17:16, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Done Thanks for the quick feedback, Giles. The messy spot on her right shoulder has been fixed and the link above has been updated with the 2nd edit. As for the table, I think it's either a soft blanket or a mattress that the model is resting her elbows on. The area in the middle at chest height was probably straightened afterwards by the creator. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 18:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Thanks for the update, Yann. Sorry I wasn't that fast :) Updated the link above: I removed the messy spot on the right shoulder that Giles mentioned. I'll leave it up to you if you want to do another update. If so, thanks in advance :) -- Radomianin (talk) 18:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Dear Yann, unfortunately in my haste I forgot to edit two spots mentioned by Giles, namely those on the right thumb and the left hand. I apologize that you have to take action again, but you can wait until tomorrow after Giles has checked again. I think all the spots are fixed now. The link above has been updated. It's the best we can do to rescue the nomination :) Sincerely, -- Radomianin (talk) 20:18, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you and very good job Radomianin! I support the third edited version with the hands blur fixed that I guess will be uploaded soon to update the actual version Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 20:25, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 10 Jun 2024 at 14:14:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Escalators at the train station in Helsinki airport.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Escalators at the train station in Helsinki airport.jpg
The ceiling (ceiling/teto is what you see inside a building, and a roof/telhado is what you see from the outside) is not horizontal, it is leaning and it is higher on the right side than the left side. There is nothing the photographer can do about it; unless he brings in a building team and have them reconstructing the station. --Cart(talk)15:43, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question There seem to be quite a few problems with the detail; naturally maps are all about accurate detail. It needs consistency of use of Norwegian/English (e.g. Gata/Gate; use of Ceramist (a person) as opposed to Ceramics/Pottery). Accommodation should be Hotel. Huset Vart seems to be a shopping centre in a converted bicycle factory, not a science factory. Do Norwegians translate Vinmonopolet as Liquor Store; the American term? I've heard them using alcohol store or using vinmonopolet when speaking English. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:41, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Just a note from a Scandi. These days the languages (Norwegian/Swedish/Danish) spoken and written by Scandinavians contain a lot of English words and expressions, and most of us don't know the difference between pure American and British English. We learn and use a hodgepodge from what we pick up in media, films and tv shows, and try to adapt what we say so that people will understand the meaning rather than true translations. It's sort of the Scandi version of Pidgin English. Hence we use the real names of companies like 'Vinmonopolet' (in Sweden, Systembolaget has the same function) when speaking among foreign friends, but terms like 'Liquor Store' when describing it to the public in general. --Cart(talk)11:18, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Whatever it should be called, the Vinmonopolet is nowhere near the shown location from 2022, so you'd never find it using this map. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:13, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Leaning keep, but a few comments/questions: 1) why not go with the svg version? 2) It looks like File:City map stavanger.svg is the user's masterwork (in its 24th edition!). 3) Since it looks like the creator regularly updates these, does promoting it to FP prevent that updating? Would it have to be a separate file? I would support a rare exception to the prohibition on changing FPs once they're promoted in a case like this, since updates are likely just going to make it more accurate (and remove mistakes/out of date locations). — Rhododendritestalk | 17:23, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Question Could you please add a description in English (even with Google Translate, native speakers will fix it if needed). Yann (talk) 14:51, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I can only see slight grain when pixel peeping the 100 megapixel image, which I don't find distracting at all. Are you perhaps referring to the ripples reflecting the sky? dllu(t,c)05:06, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, but per the header, only "[e]ditors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote." Your account only has 24 edits as of 09:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC). --SHB2000 (talk) 09:40, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Pretty uninteresting light and strangely washed out colours on the building. The sharpness could also be better.--Ermell (talk) 13:46, 2 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree about the light. Regrettably, the sky was hazy. The colors are slightly washed out since it's very far away, but I've already applied aggressive dehazing compared to the original [1]. I'm surprised to see sharpness being mentioned since the sharpness seems fine to me on the 100 megapixel photo except perhaps for the extreme corners of the image. dllu(t,c)20:20, 3 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2024 at 18:32:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Weg auf der Ostseite des Galgenfeldsees bei Haßfurt.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Weg auf der Ostseite des Galgenfeldsees bei Haßfurt.jpg
Support Beautiful autumn scenery. It could be worth trying to brighten up it further – underexposing was necessary here, but is to be compensated in post-processing. Of course it’s a matter of taste how bright it should get … – Aristeas (talk) 07:40, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2024 at 17:39:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Cuernos del Paine in Torres del Paine National Park.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cuernos del Paine in Torres del Paine National Park.jpg
Oppose The cloud obscuring parts of the mountain isn't visually appealing IMO. Also, the quality of the mountains isn't worthy of a FP, especially when the resolution and size are near 20 MB -- WildMouse76 (talk)20:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Support I like the scene. It's true that the quality of the mountains could be better, but there are many details in the foreground. --Harlock81 (talk) 10:40, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The rythme generated by the curved light rail is also visually much more interesting. In any case, the photo is misleading. Reviewers might think the picture displayed in the nomination will replace the other one with a link. Whereas it is the contrary -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:45, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Keep Too tight crop, and the curved light rail playing with the curved façade has disappeared. Composition and rythme more interesting in the promoted version -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:30, 1 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Neutral A stalemate; each image has got its advantages. Perspective, colours and atmosphere may be better in the 2014 version, but the 2012 version has a better left crop and that great curved light rail. One could want to feature both of them, but for that they are too similar. – Aristeas (talk) 07:32, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 8 Jun 2024 at 09:43:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Oxelaëre.- Porche de l église Saint-Martin, relief de Ste Cécile.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Oxelaëre.- Porche de l église Saint-Martin, relief de Ste Cécile.jpg
InfoRelief, carved with the effigy of Ste Cécile represented with her zither, to the right of the portal of the Saint-Martin church. Oxelaëre (Nord, Fr). all by me -- Pierre André (talk)09:43, 30 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose Sorry, but something is off here. I think it's the bird's positioning. It's not facing the camera and we can't really make out it's physique. Had the bird faced the camera in a classic stance, I'd have supported this image. The composition and crop are not a problem if you're wondering. WolverineXI11:59, 31 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2024 at 14:17:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
Featured picture candidates/File:Facóquero común (Phacochoerus africanus), parque nacional del Lago Mburo, Uganda, 2024-02-01, DD 66.jpgCommons:Featured picture candidates/File:Facóquero común (Phacochoerus africanus), parque nacional del Lago Mburo, Uganda, 2024-02-01, DD 66.jpg
Weak support I’d wish the focus point was a bit further away from the camera, right now the background is indeed a bit soft; but considering the resolution I think it’s still OK, and overall it’s such a beautiful scene. – Aristeas (talk) 07:26, 5 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]