Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
This project page in other languages:

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates

Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures.

Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Formal things[edit]

Nominating[edit]

Guidelines for nominators[edit]

Please read the complete guidelines before nominating.

This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:

  • Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses.
  • Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs).
    • Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information.
  • Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful.
  • General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality.
  • Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive.
    • For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates.
    • For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison.
  • Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that:
    • almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others,
    • night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime,
    • beautiful does not always mean valuable.
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents[edit]

There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject.

Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable.

Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself.

Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well.

Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:

  • Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy.
  • Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art.
  • Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject.
  • Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards.

Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced."

Photographs[edit]

On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.

  • Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp.
  • Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element.
  • Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image.
    • Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head).
  • Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph.
  • Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF.

On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.

  • Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects.
  • Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon.
  • Color is important. Oversaturated colors are not good.
  • Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch.
  • Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image.
  • Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side.
  • Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales.
Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or color AND texture, etc.
  • Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition.
  • Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph.
Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations …

You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating.

Video and audio[edit]

Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates.

Set nominations[edit]

If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:

  • Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist.
  • A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same).
  • A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes.
  • A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that).

Simple tutorial for new users[edit]

Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC
How to nominate in 8 simple steps

STEP 1

  • STEP 1

    STEP 1


STEP 2

  • STEP 2

    STEP 2


STEP 3

  • STEP 3

    STEP 3


STEP 4

  • STEP 4

    STEP 4


STEP 5

  • STEP 5

    STEP 5


STEP 6

  • STEP 6

    STEP 6


STEP 7

  • STEP 7

    STEP 7


STEP 8

  • STEP 8 (last step)

    STEP 8 (last step)

NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you.

Adding a new nomination[edit]

If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following.

Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button.

All single files:

For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2

All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".


Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page.

Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}}

Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports An image will only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.

Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~.

Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters.

Voting[edit]

Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed.

You may use the following templates:

  • {{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.

A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above.

Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:

  • No reason
  • "I don't like it" and other empty assessments
  • "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image

Remember also to put your signature (~~~~).

Featured picture delisting candidates[edit]

Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture
{{Delist}}  Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore.

This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:

Text to use Displays as Meaning
{{Keep}}  Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as a FP.
{{Delistandreplace}}  Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement.

If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box:


In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:

  • Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader);
  • A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page);
  • Your reasons for nominating the image and your username.

After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list.

As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose.

Featured picture candidate policy[edit]

General rules[edit]

  1. The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome
  4. Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing.
  7. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5)
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator).
    2. Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.)
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum.

Featuring and delisting rules[edit]

A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven  Support votes (or 7  Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, they should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page.

The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules.

Above all, be polite[edit]

Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care.

Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken.

See also[edit]

Table of contents[edit]

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity).

Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates[edit]

File:Boats on the Mekong bank with clouds and blue sky in the late afternoon in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 21 Oct 2023 at 02:02:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Boats on the Mekong bank with clouds and blue sky in the late afternoon in Luang Prabang Laos

File:Pale Blue Flycatcher 0A2A0654.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2023 at 17:49:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Pale Blue Flycatcher

File:Panorama of Urbino from a kite.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2023 at 16:14:08 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A unique aerial photo of Urbino, made with a camera attached to a kite line. The kite was launched from Fortezza di Albornoz during the 68th Festa dell'Aquilone di Urbino.

A unique aerial photo of Urbino, made with a camera attached to a kite line. The kite was launched from Fortezza di Albornoz during the 68th Festa dell'Aquilone di Urbino.

File:20191219 Fort Amber, Amer, Jaipur 0955 9481.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2023 at 14:11:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Amber Fort seen from the bank of Maotha Lake, Jaigarh Fort on the hills in the background
  • I understand that you don't have to like the photo, but I have no idea what perspective correction you are talking about. Nothing is wrong with the perspective. -- Jakubhal 15:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Strange colors for me. These and these look more natural.— Draceane talkcontrib. 16:16, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Per above, harsh light, lack of perspective correction, low detail, not convincing compo, not a FP to me Poco a poco (talk) 16:30, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Good photo of the Amber Fort, and I think this color in harsh light is OK, but the background is too washed out for my taste. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:12, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  I withdraw my nomination OK. -- Jakubhal 20:00, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Aktie Canal de Panama 1880.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2023 at 08:02:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Share certificate of 500 Francs of Panama Canal, issued November 20./29, 1880.

File:Bloemknop van een Helenium autumnale. 20-08-2023. (d.j.b).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 20 Oct 2023 at 04:40:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Museo de la iglesia de San Agustín, Manila, Filipinas, 2023-08-27, DD 82-84 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 20:58:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cemetery within San Agustin Church, Manila, Philippines.

File:Narrow-banded dartwhite (Catasticta flisa postaurea) underside on Mimosa pudica.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 18:22:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Narrow-banded dartwhite (Catasticta flisa postaurea) on Mimosa pudica
  • They are hard to find and most live at high altitude in the Andes. I usually take my insect photos now using in-camera focus-bracketing, but this species was elusive and fast-moving so I had to use one shot. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:53, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Buff-tailed coronets[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 17:38:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

  • The tirade?

    The tirade?

  • The response?

    The response?

I agree. I think this is stretching the set concept a bit too far. It is funny and all, but really: "Two birds facing each other, one with open beak" and "Two birds looking in the same direction". Is that really a set option? You usually make your little animal stories as image series, wouldn't that be better here too? See 1 and 2. Btw, I think the photos per se look great, they deserve to be FPs in some way, just make it the right way.--Cart (talk) 11:41, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Set criteria do include: "A sequence of images showing the passage of time", but I agree these guidelines can be interpreted in different ways. I could obviously remove the comments, though when Colin's Raven POTY was nominated it was described as 'a fun portrait of two characters'. There is no doubt that the bird on the left was behaving territorially and so is educational. To show you what I mean, some 40 minutes later there was another display of aggression. I have just uploaded two other photos that show what happened: this one and this one, which I would have liked to include in the set but the left bird isn't sharp enough. Also, I cannot be sure the two birds are the same ones. This sort of nomination (like Colin's) will be loved by some and hated by others. I have uploaded a composite image which could be an ALT. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yes, humor is always appreciated and goes a long way to lighten the mood on this forum. I do certainly not question the validity of a funny FP, in fact: Bring them on! Thank you for making the composite image, unfortunately 'Alts' can't be made on set nominations (they already deal with multiple images). So if voters think the composite is the best way to go, a new nomination would have to be made. Sorry about the bureaucracy! 'Pinging' previous voters for their input on this: PantheraLeo1359531 😺, ArionStar, Moataz1997, Terragio67, Ikan Kekek, Yann. --Cart (talk) 16:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Each frame of the composite image is the same size as the individual pictures, so I don't care whether they are considered as a set or as a composite image, but I also don't understand why the rules for considering a nomination would be different for a composite image than for a set; that doesn't make sense to me. Charlesjsharp, you mistakenly linked File:Buff-tailed coronets (Boissonneaua flavescens) Caldas 3.jpg twice instead of linking two photos that show what happened. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 16:25, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There are specific rules for sets. These rules do not apply if these two images are presented as a composite image in a normal nomination. To be honest, I'm simply trying to get the "legalese" right so this can sail through a nom, without irking some users who lean towards the nom not being a valid set. --Cart (talk) 16:40, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I understand, but the logic to me is that if something is misleading as a set, it's exactly as misleading as a composite of two images. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:19, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • For my person I leave my vote like this, as I think that the two images have a connection in time (as a condition for an image set) and deserve the FP promotion :) --PantheraLeo1359531 😺 (talk) 16:15, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose This doesn't fit the set criteria. Yann (talk) 14:16, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Note how two reviewers query the validity of the set in a polite and constructive manner. That is not Yann's way. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose I agree with the feedback above. It is a good idea and funny but not aligned with the criteria for sets. Poco a poco (talk) 16:27, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment I would support each of them as FP. --Aristeas (talk) 19:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I agree with Aristeas, and I see the point of those who have questioned the educational value of the captions and thus the validity of the set. While I appreciate the humour, perhaps the captions can be changed to something more descriptive? But since the captions at the actual images are already descriptive, I don't see a reason not to support. -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 20:15, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sant'Andrea della Valle in Rome (1).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 17:12:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ceiling in the Sant'Andrea della Valle church in Rome, Lazio, Italy

File:Cathedral of Ivrea (31).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 17:10:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Frontal facade of the Cathedral of Ivrea, Piedmont, Italy

File:Hampi - King's Palace - Throne Platform - Relief - 15.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 16:46:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Relief on Throne Platform in King's Palace of Hampi

File:غروب الشمس - أم الفحم.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 16:31:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sunset from Umm al-Fahm

File:Un costumédien à la Japan Addict Z de Strasbourg dans le thème de Minecraft.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 14:49:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A cosplayer at Japan Addict Z, Strasbourg.

File:Црква „Св. Богородица“ - Сретково 15.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 13:43:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The dome (left) and the bell tower (right) of Holy Mother of God Church in the village of Sretkovo

File:Tromostovje in Prešernov trg (Tromostovje and Prešeren Square).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 09:25:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Prešernov trg by night (center of Ljubljana)

File:Trigonoceps occipitalis - Vogelpark Steinen 02.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 07:41:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

White-headed vulture; Bird park Steinen, Steinen, Baden-Württemberg, Germany

File:Savigny – Église Notre-Dame-et-Sainte-Barbe – Abside 2023 08 14.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 19 Oct 2023 at 07:05:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Early 12th-century Romanesque apsis with 14th-century murals in the apse of Église Notre-Dame-et-Sainte-Barbe de Savigny, Manche, France

Alternative version[edit]

  • Thanks for the comments. I can offer this alternative version (this is an independent take of the same scene with a somewhat wider angle). --AFBorchert (talk) 03:39, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Thanks, AFBorchert, I like this better, but I think there's a crop issue with this version, too. I'll add a note for your consideration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:22, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I don't seem to be able to add a note to an alt. So on the left side, I'd recommend cropping just to the right of the red cloth, so that we see the whole crucifix and the relief but not part of the cloth and chair. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:24, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Treppenhaus im Sprinkenhof (Blick nach unten).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2023 at 21:19:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Grad Fužine (Fužine Castle, Ljubljana).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2023 at 16:31:27 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Fužine Castle

File:DDR-Grenzbeobachtungsturm 20231003 HOF00364 RAW-Export.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2023 at 15:47:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

View of the former observation tower at the former inner German border as symbol for the inner German division and surveillance in the GDR

File:Petrópolis, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 0188 04.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 18 Oct 2023 at 13:11:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

  • For good reasons, it's considered impolite (and not allowed) to {{Oppose}} a withdrawn nomination. So when the template is added to a candidature, like here, all votes (pro or contra) should simply stop. Discussions may possibly continue, but please use  comments. The FPC bot usually archives all withdrawn nominations after 24 hours (same rule as FPX and FPD written in the guidelines) but when new votes are added, then the procedure is delayed. That's why this candidature was manually archived after 1 full day. Please Ikan feel free to cast your vote now -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:30, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Catedral de la Inmaculada Concepción, Manila, Filipinas, 2023-08-26, DD 25-26 HDR.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2023 at 22:08:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral, Manila, Philippines

File:Rhinoceros in South Africa adjusted.jpg (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2023 at 13:07:43
SHORT DESCRIPTION

  •  Info Nowhere near our FP standards. Extremely poor FP IMO. (Original nomination)
  •  Delist -- 20 upper 13:07, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Neutral It's 18 years old. For 2005 acceptable. --XRay 💬 15:24, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delist --imehling (talk) 20:40, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep per XRay. --SHB2000 (talk) 23:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep per XRay - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep --Princess 🍵 Rosalina 32205 07:42, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment What am I viewing here? This seems to be a simple case of "following the crowd". When someone says something is acceptable, now everyone is saying it is fine, I'm not a psychologist, but that is common human behavior. The truth is that I don't care when the image became an FP, whether it was in 2005, 1979, or 2034. Come up with a stronger justification for keeping the image instead of that; you guys are ignoring the goal of FPC, which is to identify the site's best photos, and this picture is far from that. I know we're social creatures, but the "per [insert name]" is becoming old. I'll admit to using that phrase a couple of times, but I've since realized my mistake and will refrain from using it. 20 upper 08:51, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • 20 upper, since you are still very new to FPC and Commons, you don't know most of the unwritten rules and practices here. This is not a bunch of lemmings following the leader. Delist nominations are fairly uncommon these days, and when reviewing them, users often tend to look at old FPs and decide if they were good for the time they were made and promoted in. If we went completely by the book and treated the FP section the way you want to, there are literally thousands of FPs to delist if we judge them by today's standards, and we would have very little else to dedicate our time here at FPC to than reviewing old FPs to see if they should be delisted. The delist option was created when we had a few hundred FPs; now there are over 17,000 and it's a whole different ballgame. Delist and replace nomination are however done as we get new and better versions of old FPs.
And if you think there is some kind of herd psychology involved in using the "per Xxx", you are way wrong. You will never find a more individual lot with their own taste in pictures than FPC reviewers. This is a place where voters have no problem going up one against twenty, and say "You are wrong!" The "per" is just used as a shorthand when people tend to have the same opinion. After voting year in and year out on thousands of images, it becomes a bit hard to vary what you write about a photo.
I hope this answers you question about what you are viewing. But it's also good when newbies come in and question the way things are done. Perhaps you could start a discussion about this on the FPC talk page? This page was/is supposed to be only for voting, but it has become more of a discussion and workshop forum lately. Best, --Cart (talk) 14:26, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Yeah, w:en:WP:PERX is probably the most nonsensical policy I've ever come across and am glad we do not have this on Commons. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:31, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep Being not a member of any herd, I tend to keep it for the reasons mentioned by Cart, although I admit that it certainly wouldn't pass nowadays. --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Keep It is amazing to see the technical progress and the increase of our technical standards here on Commons, but we should not turn this against the older photographs. In 2005, most Wiki photographers used simple cameras, lenses and scanners and followed a rather documentary approach. After looking at other Commons wildlife photos from the same time, I would say this one was quite good for 2005 and the FP star was OK. I understand the objections and honour 20 upper’s intentions. But the idea of perpetual delisting of older FPs is IMHO problematic: not long, and we would also have to delist many/most of today’s FPs just because the technical progress has moved on. We should not enforce that process, but concentrate on delisting only the worst FPs. Are the photographs of famous photographers from the past bad just because they lack colour, show film grain or are low-resolution? No, because their composition, their expression etc. are not diminished by the fact that today we could take a similar photo in colour and at much higher resolutions. In the same way we should also not look contemptuously on yesterday’s FPs just because they show signs of their age – we should judge each file on its own. --Aristeas (talk) 18:44, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delist I don't care if it was good enough in 2005. "Good for the time" works for historic photographs where the time of creation actually matters. Someone looking for a great photograph of some rhinos now would be very disappointed getting this as a recommendation. --El Grafo (talk) 08:21, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delist For the composition even if we ignore the technical quality. Having one head in the shade does't work. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:12, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment You see, 20 upper, that Cart’s point has been proved: even after a full row of “keep” votes FP regulars have no problem to vote with “delist” – or whatever is the other direction. FP regulars are anything else than a will-less herd ;–). --Aristeas (talk) 14:39, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I'm not persuaded. Btw, the Wikipedia community is by far the more individual lot; the only reason I edit on Commons is to get my English Wikipedia account unblocked; it will take another 55 days for that to happen. I believe that FPC needs change, which I may bring about because I won't adhere to these "unwritten rules or practices". Nevertheless, I would want to express my gratitude to Aristeas and W.carter for their thorough and insightful comments. 20 upper 16:46, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • You could open a discussion on the talk page about the changes that FPC needs and see what level of support you get 20 upper. You never know...— Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talk • contribs) 17:49, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    OK, let me prepare ideas on my notebook. 20 upper 19:00, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delist I agree with El Grafo. FP's main goal should be to help end-users find good pictures of a particular subject. I understand the challenges of delisting a boatload of old FPs but, when faced with an execution challenge, one needs to change the approach, not the goal --Julesvernex2 (talk) 18:40, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Cognitive biases such as herd behaviour and tribalism are part of human nature, I don't think that the FP crowd or any other group should assume they're immune to them. Would be interesting to run a few images through the current open voting process and a blind one where you couldn't see the votes of others... my hunch is that the results could be quite different! --Julesvernex2 (talk)

File:City Palace, Udaipur, 20191207 1410 7154.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2023 at 08:13:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

City palace, Udaipur, Rajasthan, India
  • It's not a shake. It's a depth-of-field issue. The palace is long, and I looked at it along its length. The middle part is in focus. -- Jakubhal 07:22, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • This photo is a good achievement, but I would have preferred for the background, rather than the foreground, to be unsharp. As a result, I'm still hesitating to vote. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 21:59, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:11, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Princess 🍵 Rosalina 27060 07:42, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:14, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Weak support Very beautiful scene, and yes, the rightmost towers are just out of focus. Of course at 22 mm focal length on a camera with an APS-C sensor and only 24 megapixels ƒ/8 or so should offer enough depth of field to get almost all of the palace in focus, given that the focal plane is placed optimally (probably a tiny bit closer to the camera than it is the case here). Sorry for the nitpicking – I don’t want to criticize you, but to draw attention on technical possibilities to optimize our photographs. --Aristeas (talk) 14:57, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 18:06, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Not with this unfocused area at the right, sorry. Usually there should not be this problem when you take a photo of a building at this (or longer) distance. A pity, otherwise very nice photo. --A.Savin 12:00, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose It's a good documentary photograph of an impressive building, but with the OOF part and without an interesting sky or special light in mitigation, I just don't think it's one of Commons' best images, sorry. BigDom (talk) 13:03, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment To explain myself, because I understand criticism regarding this photo's DoF. It was taken from the (quite fast) moving boat. That is why I prioritized shutter speed over DoF here. -- Jakubhal 13:48, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support This can't be taken from land, so quality is OK. --Yann (talk) 14:20, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    This argument I don't get. Pictures from watercraft are not necessarily hard to take. It's not like a concert shot or something, where you sometimes can say "good, given the difficult light conditions"... --A.Savin 16:47, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose I understand the challenges of the image but per A.Savin, the quality on the right is just too poor and ruins the image overall. Unfortunately that's an essential part of the building. Poco a poco (talk) 16:46, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Per Poco.--Ermell (talk) 21:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Mountains Mekong river and dwellings seen from Mount Phou Si at dusk in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2023 at 01:58:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountains Mekong river and dwellings seen from Mount Phou Si at dusk in Luang Prabang Laos
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Laos
  •  Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:58, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support The photograph exhibits an excessive noise reduction which, regrettably, has resulted in the loss of essential textures vital for depth and detail in the image. Upon inspection, I notice extensive areas that have been rendered to a near-solid black color. This uniformity detracts from the visual richness and complexity of the composition. Additionally, the dynamic range appears to be limited, leading to a lack of texture and hars contrast between the brighter and darker areas. However, despite these points, I must emphasize that the overall ambiance of the image holds potential. With the right corrections, it could truly shine. The foundation is there; it just requires some technical refinement to achieve a striking piece :) --Wilfredor (talk) 02:27, 8 October 2023 (UTC). Update vote: Thanks for the new version, more better, --Wilfredor (talk) 10:49, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Weak support Per Wilfredor, but a great blue hour scene overall. ★ 02:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Not a weak  Support anymore. ★ 13:59, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • ✓ Done Thanks for the reviews. A very standard Topaz AI denoising was applied, but because the image is globally dark due to dusk, some subtle details may have disappeared. A version with no denoising at all has been uploaded (for comparison) and the last one (current one in the history) with partial denoising. Note that this is a long-exposure (10 seconds) photograph. It was almost full night, thus I can't make the sky brighter than it was, as part of the dynamic range -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:31, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Details are more visible now with the parcially denoised version. Some noise is acceptable for a long-exposure photo. ★ 04:00, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Agreed. Thanks for your feedback. When one edits such images in daylight (I mean in a room with windows before the night), some fine details in the darkest areas are hard to discern. Only the brightest parts pop up. Here I had to close my curtains to see them in the mountains. Additionally, the software is working so well with standard brightness ranges, the habit to validate sometimes too quickly should be abandoned :-) -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:38, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Katy Perry DNC July 2016 (cropped3).jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 17 Oct 2023 at 01:10:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Quota in nominations
* Comment Hello ArionStar, once again you nominate too many candidates at FPC. Please remember that only 2 nominations (TWO) are allowed here, per user. It really becomes too frequent that your nominations exceed the quota, so we have to add the {{FPD}} template. Why don't you respect the guidelines? You are an experienced participant, not a newbie, so you should know, by the time, how FPC works. If you are in a rush, you can withdraw your old nominations. But please stop burdening us with too many images and too much maintenance work -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:22, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Somewhat noisy when viewed at full size. Perhaps a de-noised version should be made. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thank you very much for the invitation to enhance this image. However, given the implications of ensuring quality and avoiding mistakes that could impact its nomination for FPC, I'd prefer to await specific guidance from @W.carter: before proceeding. His direction is vital to ensure everything is done correctly. I hope you can understand my caution on this matter. Thanks for your understanding! --Wilfredor (talk) 10:54, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Wilfredor, you don't need my permission to do anything. Just use your common sense and be polite to other people's nominations and photos. If you get an invitation, just go ahead and do it, but if you are ever unsure of if your edits are ok, put your version in a Dropbox (or some similar program), and post a link to it. Like I did on this nomination. That way the nominator/photographer can see if they like your edit and want you to upload it. Btw, I'm still a woman and not a "his". ;-D --Cart (talk) 11:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm very sorry for tell you "his", during all these years I thought you were a man, although that doesn't matter, I want there to be equal and respectful treatment. --Wilfredor (talk) 11:30, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
No problemo! We are all equal here. It's just that I've told you this before, and I thought you remembered. :-) --Cart (talk) 11:51, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Wilfredor: you're a good photographer and editor, I know you can do your best. ★ 14:06, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Arion, I uploaded a new version please, feel you free to do anything what you want with it. Denoise and problem cited by Poco a poco are fixed now. --Wilfredor (talk) 20:05, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Great! Added! ★ 20:15, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alternative version[edit]

File:Interior of the Basilica of Sainte-Anne-de-Beaupré.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2023 at 23:56:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
✓ Done Poco a poco, please take another look and tell me if its ok for you. Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 11:57, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
IMHO you went too far, but definitely better than before. Which SW did you use? Topaz? The denoising+sharpening looks better than I expected that's why I opposed right away. I go now for  Neutral Poco a poco (talk) 14:52, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Poco a poco I made everything from scratch, it should look better now. I use Topaz Denoise, I think it is the best noise eliminator out there, although I always upload a version without any denoise because I know that in the future there will be better software --Wilfredor (talk) 19:52, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Strong support - ABAL1412🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺 (talk ☭) 07:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support - Princess 🍵 Rosalina 35188 07:43, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Unbalanced crop, sorry. 20 upper 09:09, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:13, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose for now, sorry. I wanted to support this beautiful photograph, but while I enjoyed the details I stumbled over two irritating stitching errors at the leftmost and at the rightmost column (see image note). Could you please fix them? Sorry again and thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 14:40, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    ✓ Done Thank you for pointing that out, Aristeas. I've gone ahead and corrected the issue you mentioned. My apologies for the oversight and I truly appreciate your keen observation and willingness to bring it to my attention. This helps improve the quality of the photograph. Thank you again for your support and feedback my dear. Warm regards. Wilfredor (talk) 14:50, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
     Support Wow, that was fast! Thank you very much, Wilfredor; I am really happy to support your beautiful photograph! --Aristeas (talk) 15:00, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you for pointing that out. While I understand the promptness might suggest otherwise, I assure you that I did not employ any AI tool in this process. What you witnessed was a product of manual effort. It is my accumulated experience and expertise that enabled me to complete it swiftly. It's so cool having someone like you around. Thanks for everything and hope we keep rocking this together :) Wilfredor (talk) 15:15, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you very much for your understanding and the nice words! Yes, working together we can make our photographs even better. --Aristeas (talk) 16:02, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment I love this cathedral, and this is a very good photo, but I find myself missing the consistent sharpness of photos by people like Diliff. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:49, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ikan Kekek While Diliff's cathedral photographs, leveraging advanced nodal techniques, set an industry benchmark, my use of the same nodal system ensures technical precision in my images. The elimination of parallax errors through this system validates the technical competence of my photography, even if not at Diliff's acclaimed level and yes, no one reaches the Diliff level, maybe Colin--Wilfredor (talk) 01:59, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
There have been great cathedral interior photos by several other users. I don't question your technical competence at all, but I wish you could have gotten more consistent sharpness on the left side. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:02, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment The cloth on the altar looks overexposed, is it so? We can see a hint of a cross in the centre of it, and two smaller marks(?) either side, but none of the detail due to the bright whiteness. Could this be fixed? BigDom (talk) 05:50, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done BigDom Thanks --Wilfredor (talk) 07:59, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks, looks good. I take Ikan's point about the comparisons to other cathedral photographers, but I think this is easily good enough for the star on its own merit, even if the sharpness isn't the absolute pinnacle achieved by others. Personally, I prefer the lighting on the ceiling in this version compared to the alt, so happy to  Support now. BigDom (talk) 09:45, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alt[edit]

  •  Info I would like to propose this version, finxing and based on the comments of Poco a poco and Ikan Kekek --Wilfredor (talk) 07:59, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I prefer this version. Still not at Diliff level, but I think it deserves a star. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:57, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 17:18, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:34, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment You said you was going to be careful and not make the coding mistake when creating 'Alt' that you always do. Yet here you are, three days later, making the same mistake again. This is the last time I rescue one of your noms from this. --Cart (talk) 17:21, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Excuse my oversight. If it's not too much trouble, may I kindly request your esteemed guidance on the appropriate corrective measures for the error in this FPC, rather than solely its identification? Your expertise and assistance are invaluable to me, and I am most grateful for your time and consideration --Wilfredor (talk) 02:30, 12 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:01546 ITA Tuscany Sovana Market Square V-P.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2023 at 23:39:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Market square of Sovana during a moment of tranquility in early spring - Tuscany, Italy
  • Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements
  •  Info Panoramic view of Sovana's market square during a moment of tranquility in early spring - stitched from 9 shots - mercator projection - Tuscany, Italy -- c/u/n by Virtual-Pano -- Virtual-Pano (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support -- Virtual-Pano (talk) 23:39, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Neutral Virtual-Pano vividly transports us to an Italian village from the Middle Ages, a testament to the power of visual storytelling. The sheer expansive size chosen for this portrayal offers a depth and breadth that's often absent in more conventional shots. It's evident that considerable thought has gone into capturing the very essence of what one might imagine when reminiscing about ancient Italian hamlets. However, true appreciation comes not just from admiring, but also from understanding areas that might enhance a piece. The contrast, while ambitious, seems a tad overemphasized, casting an overshadowing veil in the center which potentially detracts from the delicate interplay of light and shade one might expect from such a scene. The panoramic cylindrical technique, while undoubtedly novel, introduces a curvature to the structures. This slight warping, while artistically intriguing, could be a point of contention for purists who hold dear the straight and proud lines of historic architecture. The truncation of the building on the left and the inclusion of modern distractions like the drain on the bottom right and electric lines do slightly disrupt the time-traveling illusion. Additionally, upon closer inspection, there appear to be some inconsistencies in the stitching together of the images, particularly noticeable on the floor. It would be highly beneficial and appreciated by many enthusiasts if the EXIF data were made available. Such details often provide invaluable insights into the techniques and equipment used, enhancing appreciation and offering learning opportunities for budding photographers. --Wilfredor (talk) 00:10, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Info Thanks for the detailed review and I will make an attempt to correct the flaws and upload a new version.
    Not so sure if Sovana market square is really the place to marvel about straight and proud lines of historic architecture ;-). The mercator projection has been chosen to make the purist happy as it keeps angles true (by increasing size proportionally to the object's distance from the projection equator). There is always a price one has to pay for projecting an area covering ~190° x 90° into a 2D plane. --Virtual-Pano (talk) 09:16, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Impressive size and some interesting details. Unfortunately, like Wilfredor I noticed a couple of stitching errors and have annotated these for you. BigDom (talk) 05:01, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Besides the stitching errors: Straight lines should be straight, not bent, as they are here. You can get straight lines by using for example "Microsoft ICE" to stitch a panorama (Photoshop and Lightroom often fail). --Llez (talk) 06:03, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Info✓ Done freshly stitched and rendered with a different engine. This got rid of the stitching errors and the 'contrast veil'.
    As to the workflow: this is a pano compiled from 10 hand held portrait shots (2 rows x 5 shots) hence the stitching errors which slipped my attention. Thanks to Wilfredor and BigDom for pointing me towards them.
    Unified colour temperature set before converting RAW to TIF. Cropping and final WB adjustment done with GIMP after stitching and export as jpg. Lens correction, CA suppression, contrast, saturation, brightness, shadows ... have not been touched (yet?). --Virtual-Pano (talk) 17:41, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Sorry, IMO the shadow is disturbing. --XRay 💬 15:28, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

 I withdraw my nomination My apologies for an apparently premature nomination. Thanks for the detailed and good reviews, which guided me to flaws I overlooked before nominating it. I am quite positive that all but the shadow can be adressed properly, so I will let it rest for now and revisit it at a later stage --Virtual-Pano (talk) 18:06, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alt (crop without gutter)[edit]

File:0688 Norway Lofoten bridge between Sakrisoya and Andoya.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2023 at 22:35:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Bridge connecting Sakrisoya & Andoya as part of the E10 road - Lofoten Norway

Duplicate Carina Nebula FP (delist)[edit]

Voting period ends on 16 Oct 2023 at 08:25:24
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

While inspecing our Featured Pictures (FPs), I stumbled over the funny fact that we have two almost identical FPs of the central region of the Carina Nebula: Eta Carinae Nebula 1.jpg, nominated in 2007, and NGC 3372a-full.jpg, nominated in 2018, are more or less the same.

What has happened here? The first file, Eta Carinae Nebula 1.jpg, was originally much smaller; only in 2009 a user uploaded the full resolution photo over the previous version. And, more important, in 2014‎ Eta Carinae Nebula 1.jpg was nominated for deletion. In 2021 it was undeleted again (reasoning), but while it has been deleted, NGC 3372a-full.jpg was uploaded, nominated and promoted.

When I compare both photos on the pixel level, I see that NGC 3372a-full.jpg has a little bit more contrast. It should also be the better file, technically speaking, because it uses lower compression (and therefore is very large: 200 MB vs. the 91.25 MB of Eta Carinae Nebula 1.jpg), but to be honest it is hard to see any sharpness difference. There is, of course, a difference in the metadata: NGC 3372a-full.jpg contains more metadata tags, while Eta Carinae Nebula 1.jpg is missing almost all metadata.

What should we do now? Cart, to whom I wrote first about this issue, and me think that one of the two FPs should be delisted because (besides the difference in contrast) the photos are really identical. (NB: We do not want to delete any of both files, but only one of them should be a FP.) For clarity and transparency, I have created this unusual delist nomination so that you can decide which of the two files you want to keep as FP and which one should be delisted. Please vote with {{Keep}} under the version you want to keep as FP and/or with {{Delist}} under the version you want to delist. Thank you very much! --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Eta Carinae Nebula 1.jpg[edit]

Central region of the Carina nebula. Mosaic taken by the Hubble Space Telescope

  •  Delist and replace  Delist AFAICS the only advantage of this version is the smaller file size; but it is still so big (91.25 MB) that this is not a real advantage – most computers which can handle a 91.25 MB image file can also handle the 200 MB of the other image file. --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Delist File:NGC 3372a-full.jpg is already a FP. Yann (talk) 11:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:NGC 3372a-full.jpg[edit]

Central region of the Carina nebula. Mosaic taken by the Hubble Space Telescope

  •  Keep The difference is small, but the better contrast and metadata of this version make it my favourite. In addition, this file was a finalist in Picture of the Year 2018, so it’s nice to keep it as FP. --Aristeas (talk) 08:49, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment This is already a FP. Yann (talk) 11:01, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Yes, but nevertheless it’s much clearer when people vote with {{Keep}}, isn’t it? Both pictures are already FPs, so we need to be explict which one should be kept. --Aristeas (talk) 11:09, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • And if you are angry about this nomination, Yann, because File:NGC 3372a-full.jpg was nominated by you, then I am sorry. I did not want to upset you, I just wanted to handle this as transparently as possible. So please do not take this personally. Note that I voted to keep the version which was nominated by you. But if you prefer I can stop this nomination, then you can handle this issue the way you want. --Aristeas (talk) 11:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • No, but "Delist and replace" is the wrong procedure here. This is when the new file is not a FP. Yann (talk) 11:16, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • OK, but what do we need to change? The headline says “(delist)”, the filepath says “removal”, I have changed my vote to {{Delist}}, so this is a delisting nomination, it is just not clear yet for what file. In the end this is a special nomination which cannot conform completely to the usual form of delist nominations, just because we are handling a special case. It’s clear that we will have to handle it manually in the end, FPCBot will not be able to do that. --Aristeas (talk) 11:22, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment To be clear: This is not about Aristeas’s personal preferences about an image, only a way to decide which FP to keep. During the big, and long overdue, cleanup of the FP system that Aristeas (mostly) and I have done during the past month a lot of discrepancies and errors were found. This included filing mistakes, faulty categories, fake FPs, lost FPs, vandalism, and deceptive ways to manipulate the FP system. It was during this cleanup that these two files that have accidentally both become FPs were found.
Most of the errors could be corrected in a pretty straightforward way, but this “blooper” needs the attention of the FP community. This is the first time (AFAIK) that we’ve had this situation, therefore no exact nomination template for this exists, Yann.
The ‘Delist’ system was the closest we could find. So please ignore the inexact wording on this nom, bear with this exceptional situation, and simply vote for which one of the versions you like to keep as FP and which one should be delisted. Thank You! --Cart (talk) 12:22, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Alberto Olmedo como Piluso en Canal 7-restored.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2023 at 22:26:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Previous nomination
  •  Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:26, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Better, but still not an FP-level restoration. There are a few random vertical lines and the right margin is messy. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:00, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose As stated in the previous nomination, the resolution is too small in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Alt restoration Hey! I'd love to jump in on this image restoration game. I've removed any vertical lines and also got rid of that annoying cable on the right. Cleaned up the grime on the photo and the specks from wear and tear too. I've always had Ezarate's back in the past, and this time's no different in this job! --Wilfredor (talk) 13:40, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment Please Wilfredor, it's not very polite to just "jump in" and create an alt on someone else's nomination, you should ask first if this is ok. Also, when you create an 'Alt', you need to make a subsection to the original nom, not just a bold heading, otherwise the FPC Bot might not treat the nom the right way. You constantly make this mistake. I have fixed it for you, again. --Cart (talk) 17:08, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Thanks Wilfredor, I uploaded your fixed version over my version (next time you can use my uploads to do your fixed, this is a collaborative project, so your job is welcome, thanks!!! Ezarateesteban 22:05, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'm sorry, but what are you doing now? Placing the 'withdraw' template here will withdraw the whole nom, and it's not your nomination. If you want to cancel your 'Alt', just strike it and remove your image. It's good that you try to fix things, but this just made it worse.--Cart (talk) 22:00, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ok done, We will continue over the firts nomination. --Wilfredor (talk) 22:33, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
We can continue over the first version, thanks @W.carter: --Ezarateesteban 22:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Finally it’s good now! ★ 17:12, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@ArionStar: Please, consider move your vote above, thanks!!! Ezarateesteban 22:07, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
✓ Done. ★ 22:53, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Comment This really is much better, but on reflection, I tend to think Basile is right about the size of the picture. But I still think the restoration is worthwhile. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:46, 9 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Solang valley under snow, 2015.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2023 at 21:34:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Top end of cableway in Solang, a small but popular ski resort north of Manali in Himachal Pradesh, northern India
  • As part of the composition the cut-out roof is a bit awkward in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:53, 8 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alt (edited)[edit]

 I withdraw my nomination The edited alt seems to have been buried under other noms, perhaps a future nom could be made. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:15, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Sheldonian Theatre Oxford 2023 03.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period ends on 15 Oct 2023 at 05:54:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Sheldonian Theatre, Oxford
Confirmed results:
Result: 22 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 13:15, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United Kingdom

File:Црква „Св. Атанасиј“ - Градец 8.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2023 at 20:49:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

St. Athanasius Church in the village of Gradec, Valandovo

File:Pitigliano - Aquedotto Medicei - 2.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 14 Oct 2023 at 17:03:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Aqueduct and City Walls of Pitigliano
  •  Comment I like that composition much better. Would it be OK to give that as an alternate? I'm thinking it might be too different for that to be OK. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:44, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support for both per Aristeas. And yes, I have also been there and tried --Kritzolina (talk) 06:54, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Alt[edit]

Square crop

File:Nam Định 1924.jpg[edit]

Voting period ends on 12 Oct 2023 at 16:18:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Physical map of Ancient Greece-ru.svg[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2023 at 17:45:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Map of Ancient Greece in SVG on russian language for students of antiquity with the opportunity to translate into their native language
  • Do you mean the question marks themselves? If so, no, it doesn't. My first thought was that the names of the places in question are uncertain, not the locations. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:40, 5 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I understand your complaint, I will correct it Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 02:54, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    I read the rules and it says that during the nomination you cannot change the image, I will change it later Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 13:37, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Question Which rules are those? Images are routinely changed during nominations; it's just that all voters have to be pinged if the changes are significant. But please tell me how you plan to address this issue. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:01, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    in the "abbreviations" section I will add a question mark and an explanation to it Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 07:23, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    changed the file - look "for reference" Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 07:36, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support I can't read Russian, but I see a name with a question mark after it in the legend. It's interesting that when I wanted to look at this file at full size, it defaulted to 30%. I wonder if that's happening to other people, but it's something to be aware of. This map is more wowy at full size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:35, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    ctrl + mouse wheel Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 09:13, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I got to 100% a different way: by noticing the 30% default and clicking on it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:26, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support--Princess 🍵 Rosalina 37693 03:32, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Support Have to confess that I would be much more happy if the city and place names were just in the original ancient Greek – I never understand why people “translate” ancient place names to English, German, Russian, etc. But the map itself is excellent, and it’s a great achievement that we finally get more and more good vector (SVG) maps. --Aristeas (talk) 07:10, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Thank you very much) I have distant plans to do it in Ancient Greek and Latin Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 13:29, 6 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Ah, nice to hear that! Well, probably it’s a good idea to use your own language (or another widespread language) while working on the map. When the map is (almost) perfect, translating it to other languages (like Greek and Latin) is easier. So you did it right. --Aristeas (talk) 07:14, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    By the way, Latin names are almost entirely used in English Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 10:28, 7 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  •  Oppose Why Russian? Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:18, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    because I have the right to realize my creativity in my native language Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 14:38, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Wikimedia Commons is a multilingual project.
    Пётр Тарасьев (talk) 14:53, 10 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think it is. Why would we want to feature a map of Greece in Russian? Ancient or Modern Greek would be logical. English also. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:56, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • What other languages with over 100 million speakers are OK to you? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:28, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • I think that the objection was intented to be: Why featuring a map of Ancient Greece in Russian and not in ancient Greek? --Harlock81 (talk) 11:13, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    So that people in Russia can read it and learn something without needing to know Ancient Greek? BigDom (talk) 13:07, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    Sorry, maybe I was misunderstood. featuring = appointing as featured image. --Harlock81 (talk) 15:19, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Las Vegas Strip from Resorts World February 2023 HDR 1.jpg, featured[edit]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Oct 2023 at 08:16:45 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Las Vegas Strip at night
Confirmed results:
Result: 13 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 13:11, 11 October 2023 (UTC)Reply[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#United States


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)[edit]

Sat 07 Oct → Thu 12 Oct
Sun 08 Oct → Fri 13 Oct
Mon 09 Oct → Sat 14 Oct
Tue 10 Oct → Sun 15 Oct
Wed 11 Oct → Mon 16 Oct
Thu 12 Oct → Tue 17 Oct

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)[edit]

Tue 03 Oct → Thu 12 Oct
Wed 04 Oct → Fri 13 Oct
Thu 05 Oct → Sat 14 Oct
Fri 06 Oct → Sun 15 Oct
Sat 07 Oct → Mon 16 Oct
Sun 08 Oct → Tue 17 Oct
Mon 09 Oct → Wed 18 Oct
Tue 10 Oct → Thu 19 Oct
Wed 11 Oct → Fri 20 Oct
Thu 12 Oct → Sat 21 Oct

Closing a featured picture promotion request[edit]

The bot[edit]

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure[edit]

Any experienced user may close requests.

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
     (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    featured or not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. If it is featured:
    • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
    • Also add the picture to the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
    • Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
      • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
      • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
    • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
      • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
      • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
    • Add == FP promotion ==
      {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
  5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
    '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
    (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
  2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
    delisted or not delisted
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
  3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2023.
  4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
    1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
    2. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night shots, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
    3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
  5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination[edit]

  1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
    In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
    {{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}}
  2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
    not featured
    For example:
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
    becomes
    === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
  3. Save your edit.
  4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
    {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
    Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/October 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=804402179"