Springe zu den aktuellen Kandidaten

Dies sind die Kandidaten für die exzellenten Bilder. Beachte, dass es sich hierbei nicht um das Bild des Tages handelt.

Bitte lies alle Leitsätze vor der Nominierung.

Dies ist eine Zusammenfassung von Kriterien, auf die du bei der Einreichung und Bewertung von Exzellenz-Kandidaten achten solltest:

• Auflösung – Fotografien mit einer Auflösung unter 2 Millionen Pixel werden in der Regel abgelehnt, außer unter „stark mildernden Umständen“. Beachte, dass ein 1600 x 1200 großes Foto 1,92 Megapixel hat und damit weniger als 2 Millionen.

Grafiken auf Commons können auch in anderen Weisen als zur Anzeige auf einen herkömmlichen Computerbildschirm verwendet werden. Sie können auch als Ausdruck oder zur Anzeige auf hochauflösenden Bildschirmen verwendet werden. Man kann nicht vorhersagen, welche Geräte in Zukunft Anwendung finden, deshalb ist es wichtig, dass die nominierten Bilder die höchstmögliche Auflösung haben.

• Eingescannte Bilder – solange es keine offizielle Richtlinie gibt, findet man unter Help:Scannen für verschiedene Typen von Bildern Hinweise für die Vorbereitung, die hilfreich sein können.

• Fokus – jedes wichtige Objekt im Bild sollte normalerweise scharf sein.

• Vordergrund und Hintergrund – Objekte im Vorder- und Hintergrund können stören. Kontrolliere, ob etwas vor dem Motiv des Bildes wichtige Elemente verdeckt. Auch soll nichts im Hintergrund die Komposition verderben, zum Beispiel eine Straßenlampe, die über dem Kopf einer abgebildeten Person „steht“.

• Allgemeine Qualität – nominierte Bilder sollten von hoher technischer Qualität sein.

• Digitale Manipulationen betrügen nicht in jedem Fall den Betrachter. Digitale Nachbearbeitungen, um Fehler von Fotografien zu korrigieren, sind allgemein akzeptiert, vorausgesetzt, sie sind begrenzt und gut gemacht, ohne dabei betrügen zu wollen. Akzeptiert werden normalerweise Beschneiden, perspektivische Korrekturen, Schärfen und Verwischen sowie Farb- und Belichtungskorrekturen. Umfangreichere Korrekturen wie das Entfernen von störenden Hintergrundobjekten sollten in der Bildbeschreibung mit Hilfe der Vorlage {{Retouched picture}} klar beschrieben werden. Nicht oder falsch beschriebenen Manipulationen, die dazu führen, dass das Hauptmotiv falsch dargestellt wird, sind unter keinen Umständen akzeptabel.

• Wert – unser Hauptziel ist das Hervorheben der wertvollsten Bilder von allen anderen. Bilder sollten irgendwie etwas Besonderes sein. Darum sei dir bewusst, dass:
  • nahezu jeder Sonnenuntergang ästhetisch ansprechend ist und die meisten keinen wesentlichen Unterschied aufweisen zu anderen,
  • Nachtaufnahmen hübsch sind, aber dass man normalerweise mit Aufnahmen bei Tag mehr Details zeigen kann,
  • schön nicht immer wertvoll bedeuten muss.

Auf der fachlichen Seite gibt es die Belichtung, die Komposition, die Bewegungskontrolle und die Fokustiefe zu beachten.

• Belichtung bezieht sich auf die Verschluss-Blende-Kombination, die ein Bild mit einer Tonkurve wiedergibt. Idealerweise bildet diese Tonkurve in akzeptabler Genauigkeit Schatten- und Spitzlichtbereiche im Bild ab. Dies nennt man „Belichtungsspielraum“. Bilder können im niedrigen Teil der Tonkurve (unterer Bereich), im mittleren (mittlerer Bereich) oder hohen Teil (oberer Bereich) liegen. Digitale Kameras (oder Bilder) haben einen engeren Belichtungsspielraum als Fotofilme. Fehlende Genauigkeit im Schattenbereich ist nicht unbedingt ein Nachteil. Tatsächlich kann dies ein gewünschter Effekt sein. Eingebrannte Spitzenlichter sind dagegen ein störendes Element.

• Komposition bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Elemente im Bild selbst. Die „Drittel-Regel“ ist ein guter Grundsatz für die Komposition und ein Erbe der Gemäldemalerei. Die Idee ist, das Bild mit jeweils zwei horizontalen und zwei vertikalen Linien zu teilen. Dadurch wird das Bild in horizontale und vertikale Drittel geteilt. Das Motiv im Zentrum des Bildes zu platzieren, ist oft weniger interessant, als es auf einem der vier Schnittpunkte der horizontalen und vertikalen Schnittlinien zu platzieren. Der Horizont sollte eigentlich niemals in der Mitte des Bildes liegen, wo er das Bild in zwei Hälften „teilt“. Die obere oder untere horizontale Linie ist oft eine gute Wahl. Der Hauptgedanke ist, den Raum zu nutzen, um ein dynamisches Bild zu schaffen.

• Bewegungskontrolle bezieht sich auf die Weise, wie die Bewegung im Bild abgebildet wird. Die Bewegung kann stillstehend oder verschwommen sein. Weder das eine noch das andere ist besser; es kommt auf den Zweck der Aufnahme an. Bewegung ist relativ innerhalb der Objekte des Bildes. Zum Beispiel vermittelt uns das Fotografieren eines relativ zum Hintergrund stillstehenden Rennwagens kein Gefühl für das Tempo oder die Bewegung. Also zwingt uns die Fototechnik, das Motiv stillstehend vor verschwommenem Hintergrund abzubilden, wodurch ein Gefühl für die Bewegung entsteht. Dies nennt man „Schwenken“. Andererseits kann eine Aufnahme eines im Vergleich zur Umgebung stillstehenden Basketballspielers während eines hohen Sprunges das „Unnatürliche“ der Natur dieser Pose sichtbar machen.

• Fokustiefe (DOF – Depth Of Field) bezieht sich auf den Fokusbereich vor und hinter dem Hauptmotiv. Die Fokustiefe wird abhängig von den spezifischen Erfordernissen jedes Bildes gewählt. Große oder kleine Fokustiefe kann auf die eine oder andere Weise die Qualität der Aufnahme vergrößern oder schmälern. Geringe Fokustiefe kann die Aufmerksamkeit auf das Hauptmotiv des Bildes lenken, das Hauptmotiv erscheint dadurch von seiner Umgebung gelöst. Hohe Fokustiefe bringt Abstände zwischen Motiven zur Geltung. Objektive mit kurzer Brennweite (Weitwinkel) ergeben eine hohe Fokustiefe, umgekehrt haben Objektive mit langer Brennweite (Teleobjektive) eine flache Fokustiefe. Kleine Blendenöffnungen bringen große Fokustiefe, und umgekehrt große Blendenöffnungen bringen flache Fokustiefen.

Bei den grafischen Elementen gibt es Form, Volumen, Farbe, Struktur, Perspektive, Balance, Proportion, usw.

• Form bezieht sich auf den Umriss des Hauptmotivs.

• Volumen bezieht sich die dreidimensionale Qualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenlicht herausgebildet. Im Gegenteil zum allgemeinen Glauben ist Frontbeleuchtung nicht die beste Wahl. Frontbeleuchtung lässt das Motiv abflachen. Das beste Tageslicht hat man am frühen Morgen oder nachmittags.

• Farbe ist wichtig. Übersättigte Farben sind nicht gut.

• Struktur bezieht sich auf die Oberflächenqualität des Motivs. Diese wird durch Seitenbeleuchtung verbessert.

• Perspektive bezieht sich auf den „Grad“ zusammen mit Linien, die in einen Fluchtpunkt innerhalb oder außerhalb des Bildes enden.

• Balance bezieht sich auf die Anordnung der Motive innerhalb des Bildes, die entweder das scheinbar gleiche Gewicht haben oder schwerer auf einer Seite erscheinen.

• Proportion bezieht sich auf die Größenunterschiede der Objekte im Bild. Normalerweise tendieren wir dazu, kleine Gegenstände klein im Vergleich zu anderen darzustellen. Eine gute Methode kann aber sein, kleine Objekte groß im Gegensatz zu wirklichen Größenverhältnissen abzubilden. Zum Beispiel: Eine kleine Blume überwiegt gegenüber einem großen Berg. Dies nennt man Maßstabsinversion.

Nicht alle Elemente müssen berücksichtigt werden. Einige Fotografien können anhand individueller Eigenschaften beurteilt werden. Für ein Bild kann die Farbe oder die Struktur wichtig sein, oder Farbe und Strukur, usw.

• Symbolische Aussage oder Relevanz…. Der Meinungskrieg kann hier beginnen…. Ein schlechtes Bild von einem sehr schwierigen Motiv ist ein besseres Bild als ein gutes Bild von einem gewöhnlichen Motiv. Ein gutes Bild von einem schwierigen Motiv ist ein außergewöhnliches Foto.

Bilder können kulturell beeinflusst sein durch den Fotografen und/oder den Betrachter. Die Bedeutung des Bildes sollte vor dem kulturellen Hintergrund des Bildes beurteilt werden, nicht durch den kulturellen Hintergrund des Betrachters. Ein Bild „spricht“ zu Menschen und hat die Möglichkeit, Emotionen auszulösen, wie zum Beispiel Zärtlichkeit, Zorn, Ablehnung, Heiterkeit, Traurigkeit usw. Gute Fotografen sind nicht darauf beschränkt, gefällige Emotionen zu provozieren.

Um die Chancen für einen Erfolg deiner Nominierung zu erhöhen, lies vor der Nominierung alle Leitsätze.

Wenn du glaubst, ein Bild mit passender Bildbeschreibung und Lizenz gefunden oder geschaffen zu haben, das als wertvoll erachtet werden könnte, folge der anschließenden Anleitung.

Schritt 1: Kopiere den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:), hinter den schon im Feld stehenden Text, zum Beispiel „Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG“. Danach klicke auf die Schaltfäche mit der Aufschrift „neue Nominierung aufstellen“.

Schritt 2: Folge den Anweisungen der geöffneten Seite, und sichere sie.

Schritt 3: Füge manuell einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Kandidatenliste ein: Hier klicken, und füge folgende Zeile OBEN bei der Nominierungslist ein:

{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:DEIN-BILD-DATEINAME.JPG}}

Du kannst folgende Vorlagen benutzen:

• {{Support}} ( Support) (Stimme zur Unterstützung des Exzellenz-Status),
• {{Oppose}} ( Oppose) (Stimme gegen den Exzellenz-Status),
• {{Neutral}} ( Neutral) (neutrale Meinung, keine Stimme),
• {{Comment}} ( Comment) (es folgt ein Kommentar, keine Stimme),
• {{Info}} ( Info) (es folgen Informationen, keine Stimme),
• {{Question}} ( Question) (es folgt eine Frage, keine Stimme)

Du kannst angeben, dass das Bild keine Chance für eine erfogreiche Kandidatur hat. Benutze die Vorlage {{FPX|reason}}, wobei reason angibt, warum das nominierte Bild klar unakzeptabel für die exzellenten Bilder ist.

Weitere Vorlagen gibt es hier.

Bitte füge ein paar Worte an, warum dir das Bild gefällt oder nicht gefällt, insbesondere wenn du dagegen stimmst. Bitte denke auch daran, zu unterschreiben (~~~~). Anonyme Stimmen sind nicht zugelassen.

Mit der Zeit ändern sich die Standards für die Exzellenten Bilder. Es kann entschieden werden, dass Bilder, die vorher „gut genug“ für die Exzellenten waren, es nicht mehr sind. Dies ist zum Aufstellen eines Bildes, welches deiner Meinung nach es nicht mehr verdient, exzellent zu sein. Dazu wähle mit

• {{Keep}}  Keep (das Bild verdient es immer noch, als exzellent zu gelten) oder mit
• {{Delist}}  Delist (das Bild verdient es nicht mehr, als exzellent zu gelten).

Wenn du denkst, dass ein Bild nicht mehr den Exzellenz-Kriterien entspricht, kannst du es für die Abwahl nominieren, indem du den Bildnamen in dieses Textfeld (einschließlich des Zusatzes Image:) hinter den bereits stehenden Text im Feld kopierst:

In der eben erstellten neuen Seite für die Nomination des Abwahlkandidaten solltest du einfügen:

• Informationen über den Ursprung des Bildes (Ersteller, Uploader),
• Einen Link zur originalen Exzellenz-Kandidatur-Seite (es erscheint unter „Links“ auf der Beschreibungsseite),
• Deine Begründung für die Nominierung und dein Benutzername.

Danach musst du einen Link zu der erstellten Seite oben auf der Seite mit der Liste der Abwahlkandidaten manuell einfügen.

1. Nach dem Ende des Abstimmungs-Zeitraumes wird das Ergebnis am Tag 10 nach der Nominierung festgestellt (im Zeitplan weiter unten gezeigt). Also dauert der Abstimmungs-Zeitraum 9 Tage, plus die Stunden bis zum Ende von Tag 9. Stimmen, die an Tag 10 oder danach abgeben wurden, werden nicht gezählt.
2. Nominierungen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
3. Mitwirken bei Diskussionen von anonymen Mitwirkenden sind erwünscht.
4. Nur Nutzer mit einem commons-account, der mindestens 10 Tage alt ist und 50 Beiträge hat, können wählen. Ausnahme: Die eigene Nominierung kann gewählt werden, unabhängig von Alter und Beiträge.
5. Die Nominierung zählt nicht als Stimme. Unterstützung muss explizit angegeben werden.
6. Nominierungen können vom Einsteller jederzeit zurückgezogen werden. Dies geschieht einfach durch das Schreiben von „I withdraw my nomination“ (eng. Ich ziehe meine Nominierung zurück)
   oder durch Hinzufügen von {{withdraw}} ~~~~.
7. Denke daran, das Ziel von Wikimedia Commons ist es, einen zentralen Speicher für freie Bilder, genutzt von allen Wikimedia-Projekten, bereitzustellen, einschließlich für mögliche zukünftige Projekte. Dies ist nicht einfach ein Speicher für Wikipedia-Bilder, deshalb sollten hier die Bilder nicht danach beurteilt werden, ob sie zu diesem Projekt passen.
8. Bilder können vorzeitig am Tag 5 (fünfter Tag nach der Nominierung) von der Abstimmungsliste genommen werden („Regel des 5. Tages“):
   1. Wenn sie keine Unterstützung erhalten, die Einsteller nicht mitgezählt.
   2. Wenn sie 10 oder mehr Pro und kein Kontra erhalten haben.
9. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPX}} markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden, vorausgesetzt, das Bild hat außer von den Einstellern keine positiven Stimmen (Unterstützung) erhalten.
10. Bilder, welche durch die Vorlage {{FPD}} (FP denied) markiert wurden, können 48 Stunden, nachdem die Vorlage gesetzt wurde, von der Liste entfernt werden.
11. Es dürfen von einem Benutzer maximal 2 Nominierungen gleichzeitig platziert werden.

Ein Kandidat wird in die Galerie der exzellenten Bilder aufgenommen, wenn folgende Bedingungen erfüllt sind:

1. Passende Lizenz (selbstverständlich)
2. Mindestens 7 positive Stimmen (Pro-Stimmen)
3. Das Verhältnis von unterstützenden zu ablehnenden Stimmen ist mindestens 2/1 (eine Zwei-Drittel-Mehrheit)
4. Zwei verschiedene Versionen desselben Bildes können nicht beide exzellent werden, sondern nur das mit der höheren Zahl an Stimmen.

Die Abwahl-Regeln sind dieselben wie zur Wahl der exzellenten Bilder bei gleichbleibenden Abstimmungs-Zeitraum. Die Regel des 5. Tages gilt für Abwahlkandidaten, die keine Stimme für die Aberkennung des Exzellenz-Status' bis zum Tag 5 erhalten haben, außer die des Antragstellers.

Ein erfahrener Nutzer kann die Anfrage beenden. Wie man eine Anfrage beendet, siehe unter Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder/Was tun, wenn der Abstimmungszeitraum zu Ende ist.

Bitte bedenke, dass das Bild, das du beurteilst, das wohlüberlegte Werk von jemandem ist. Vermeide Phrasen wie „it looks terrible“ (eng. sieht schrecklich aus) oder „I hate it“ (eng. Ich hasse es). Wenn du dagegen Stellung nehmen musst, tu dies bitte mit Rücksichtnahme. Bedenke außerdem, dass deine Englischkenntnisse nicht die gleichen sein müssen wie die eines anderen. Wähle deine Worte sorgfältig.

Viel Spaß beim Bewerten …, und denke daran: Alle Regeln können gebrochen werden.

• Zum Bearbeiten der Liste mit den Nominierungen klicke auf: Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list
• Eine chronologische Liste ist unter Commons:Featured pictures/chronological zu finden.
• Ein Archiv vergangener Nominierungen liegt unter Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log.
• Eine Anleitung, wie man Nominierungen beendet, findet sich unter Commons:Kandidaten für exzellente Bilder/Was tun, wenn der Abstimmungszeitraum zu Ende ist.

• Kandidaten für Qualitätsbilder
• Kritiken von Fotografien

Seite erneut laden für neue Nominierungen: purge this page's cache

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 14:25:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Primates#Family : Cebidae (Capuchins and Squirrel Monkeys)
•  Info A Near-Threatened species. No FPs of this Genus. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Excellent photo. Thank you for adding the more specific location category - but please do try to remember to add the date category in future (in this case, Ecuador photographs taken on 2025-04-19). Cmao20 (talk) 14:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, but is the date category a rule of FPC? Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:58, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• It's not an absolute rule but it's just generally good practice. See here under the 'Categorization tips' section. I haven't always done it in my past nominations either but we are trying to tighten this up and make sure as many FPs as possible have this done. Cmao20 (talk) 16:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• (Edit conflict) It is not written in as an item in the FPC rules, but a date category is of great help for people who are interested in images for chronological reasons. Commons normal search system is tricky to use if only the camera's time stamp is on the photo. It is much easier to find a photo from a specific date if it's in a date category. Please compare just typing, for example, "September 2015 Ecuador" in the normal search box, as opposed to writing "Category:September 2015 in Ecuador" or "Category:September 2015 Ecuador photographs". There are people on Commons who specialize in sorting photos into these date categories. I'm sure they will appreciate whatever help they can get from photographers who add these cats to their photos themselves. --Cart (talk) 16:09, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Date categories are sometimes added to my photos, irrespective of whether they are FP, QI, VI or none of these. I do not think this should be a mandatory requirment for FPC. If, after a proposal and vote, the rules are changed, I will of course comply. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The base for FPCs is the same as for any file on Commons, FPC is just an additional step up. Since date categories are recommended for all photos on Commons per the link Cmao20 provided above, that does include FPCs too. I hope you don't mind if other users add such categories to your photos during nominations; they are really useful. --Cart (talk) 16:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I am very happy for other users to add date or any other (accurate) categories they fancy. The link, if you read it carefully, does not actually recommend date categories for all photos on Commons, which is presumably why you've not used them in all your June FPCs... Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:12, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Under 'categorization tips' - 'The categories you choose for your uploads should answer as many as possible of the following questions... when?: when did the depicted events happen, or when was the image created? When was the image taken?'. So, not a rule but certainly a recommendation. I'm looking at Cart's June FPs and she has used them on five out of seven, missing 1, 2. I'll add them to those ones. Cmao20 (talk) 17:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• True, mea cupla, I'm just as bad as everyone else until I was made aware of this by another user. There are always old things to upgrade here as Commons evolves. But it's never too late to shape up and do the right thing. I was just done fixing the backlog for 'Captions' for all my photos, and now I'm on fixing 'Structured data', so might as well do the date categories too. --Cart (talk) 17:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Yes, I think what we all need to do is to leave behind recent recriminations and conflicts over this issue and just try to get categories right going forward, using the 'who', 'what', 'when', 'where' questions the best we can. I've definitely not been good at this in the past. Cmao20 (talk) 17:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It took me a little over four months to add 'Caption' and 'Location' to all my more than 10,000 photos. ;) --Cart (talk) 17:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support A photo that makes you look twice, and the second time you smile. Thanks for adding good categories and description, much appreciated. --Cart (talk) 15:49, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Stunning! --Osmo Lundell hey 17:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2025 at 09:42:47 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Accipitriformes#Genus_:_Gyps
•  Info created and uploaded by Mildeep – nominated by Nirmal Dulal -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 09:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Nirmal Dulal (talk) 09:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 10:57, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Cart (talk) 11:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Wow! --Yann (talk) 13:39, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:44, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support like the wii sports guy said, nice shot! --Osmo Lundell hey 17:21, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 17:47:51 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Trochilidae (Hummingbirds)
•  Info Fawn-breasted Brilliant (Heliodoxa rubinoides) in Ecuador. Сreated by Andy Morffew – uploaded/nominated by me Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support A tad over-sharpened, but the bird and the compo are great. I love the moss on the branch, it complements the colors of the bird so well. --Cart (talk) 19:43, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Honestly the oversharpening is to mask the fact that the beak is slightly outside the depth of field. Always tempting to oversharpen a little in such a circumstance but if Andy Morffew were a Commons author I'd probably suggest he toned it down a little on this picture. Unfortunately he is only active on Flickr. But the image is still at FP level for me. Cmao20 (talk) 00:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support --Osmo Lundell hey 21:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:33, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:41, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 17:47:34 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Trochilidae (Hummingbirds)
•  Info Sword-billed Hummingbird (Ensifera ensifera) in Ecuador. Сreated by Andy Morffew – uploaded/nominated by me Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Юрий Д.К 17:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment I've upgraded the file name according to Commons file names. In the future, please make sure such the file name is really good before making the nom. Now it's up to you (preferably) to fix the Image description and Categories to get them up to FP standard. Thank you. --Cart (talk) 18:32, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  All done, thanks to Cart and Cmao20 Юрий Д.К 19:39, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 00:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 02:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:28, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support The shot of the bird is excellent, but we miss the flower. ;-) --Harlock81 (talk) 08:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• It would not be at a live flower! It's another high quality 'studio' shot... Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:00, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 15:40:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Germany
•  Info No FPs of this interesting medieval church. Huge resolution (103 megapixels) and excellent quality (observe how the lettering on the side benches is fully legible). created by DXR – uploaded by DXR – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Very good! Юрий Д.К 19:42, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment The image itself is technically very impressive! Maybe it could be cropped a bit? To me there is maybe too much going on at once – in a way the image feels a bit cluttered, especially in the lower section. Won't you agree? --Osmo Lundell hey 21:09, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• There are more focussed crops (1, 2) but I honestly selected this one because I liked how much there is going on in the frame, I enjoyed this wide, expansive view of the church. Let's see how votes go. Cmao20 (talk) 22:42, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I would happily support the the second one! --Osmo Lundell hey 23:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I was originally going to nominate that one (you can see I've formatted the description and categories ready for an FP nomination) but I didn't like the fact that the clock face leaning against the wall at the right was cropped. I'll admit that this one does have its drawbacks per Acroterion but I find it more satisfying overall. Cmao20 (talk) 16:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment The inherent distortion gives me pause, most evident in the upper level arches, which are stretched to twice their size and made elliptical by the view. The image illustrates a photographic effect rather than a depiction of the church interior Acroterion (talk) 02:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 02:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:01, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:38, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 15:40:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Isère
•  Info Scenic and well composed French panorama. No FPs of the Lac de Grand Maison and its surroundings. created by MirandaAdramin – uploaded by MirandaAdramin – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 15:40, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Nice! --Osmo Lundell hey 21:14, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Юрий Д.К 21:17, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Cart (talk) 09:51, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Weak  Support because I feel that among this bunch of photos this one is the best. Still a great picture (and place). --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:05, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Honestly I don't like that one anything like as much. I think the path adds a visual counterpoint in this one, and elevates the whole scene from what could otherwise be a little bland. Cmao20 (talk) 16:02, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 14:50:59 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Industry#Sweden
•  Info created by Cart – uploaded by Cart – nominated by ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment - Beautiful panorama of the fog at blue hour over the towers at Preemraff oil refinery in Lahälla, Lysekil Municipality, Sweden. - ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- ERcheck (talk) 14:50, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  weak support It's very pretty and I love the panoramic format which gives us a whole wide expanse of lovely reflections. But the left of this panorama is visibly less sharp than the right. Overall scrapes over the bar because of subject and pleasant lighting conditions. Cmao20 (talk) 15:43, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Comment: The fog was rolling in from the left, so denser fog conditions on left than on right. ERcheck (talk) 15:47, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I know, but that doesn't justify what seems more like slight motion blur than merely softness. Cmao20 (talk) 16:00, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  You can read the discussion preceding this nom. --Cart (talk) 16:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks for the link, I didn't know about this phenomenon. My vote remains 'weak support' though. Cmao20 (talk) 16:18, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Very understandable. --Cart (talk) 16:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Full support after changes. Cmao20 (talk) 16:59, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Having seen similar effects of emerging fog in my photos, I understand that the little softness was unavoidable, and the atmosphere and the impressive overall effect are much more important to me. – Aristeas (talk) 18:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Åh, så vackert! --Osmo Lundell hey 21:10, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I was about to kvetch about the 'motion blur' before I learned it was refraction. No motion blur, no objections. JayCubby (talk) 21:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose Nice scene, but unfortunately the left frame is not of the same quality as the right one.--Ermell (talk) 22:08, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose Per Ermell, this is very obvious, cannot understand the preceding supporting votes Poco a poco (talk) 08:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Neutral the left side is not just unsharp, but actually blurry (as pointed by Cart herself in the pre-nom discussion). But the rest of the image is quite sharp. And this is a large pano, so perhaps a crop and conversion to landscape? --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 12:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Crops are always possible, but I don't think that would make for a photo with the same visual impact. Having just that part is rather boring. --Cart (talk) 12:16, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment New version uploaded. Even though I like this pano very much, I never expected it to get this much attention, so I've never gone back and made the most of it. I found one frame taken 10 min before the rest of the photos, because I liked the little break in the fog that let through some light. It's much sharper because of that fog-break, but it never occurred to me to use it. This time I also have a better version of Lightroom, so overall I could fix the pano better than before. Anyway, see what you think. 'Pinging' previous voters: ERcheck, Cmao20, Aristeas, Osmo Lundell, JayCubby, Ermell, Poco a poco and UnpetitproleX. You might want to F5 it. --Cart (talk) 15:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks, perfect now! whole-hearted  Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 16:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  This one is great! Still have my Support vote. - ERcheck (talk) 16:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2025 at 11:56:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I added categories for the date, the trees, and the weather conditions. Cmao20 (talk) 13:48, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you, @Cmao20: for that! UnpetitproleX (Talk) 07:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Very beautiful. Thank you Cmao20 for fixing this. --Cart (talk) 14:29, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Юрий Д.К 21:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 02:42, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:26, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose Square crops for far view landscapes doesn't usually work, I struggle here with the compo and the level of detail is not the best, either, sorry. Not a FP to me. Poco a poco (talk) 08:34, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Except the crop is not square at all. It is a 4:3 crop. I can try 3:2 and take off some of the sky and the bottom, but I'm unsure if that is significantly better. In any case, not square to begin with. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 09:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2025 at 15:35:31 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family_:_Equidae_(Equids)
•  Info created and uploaded by Byrdyak – nominated by Kelly zhrm -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 15:35, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 15:54, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment Unconvinced the documentation is at FP level, although the picture certainly is. 'Three zebra' seems a very bare-bones title, and 'unidentified subspecies' in the categories doesn't give me much confidence (and the picture is also categorised with a specific subspecies - which is it? Do we know the subspecies or don't we? Unfortunately this is just the kind of thing the short lived checklist was designed to point out... Cmao20 (talk) 19:08, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose on this basis until some work is done to address these problems. I would not usually oppose for fixable category mistakes but the nomination seems to be picking up lots of support anyway and I don't think it should be promoted in this condition. Cmao20 (talk) 13:56, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• +1. This oppose will slow down the nom enough for the issues to be fixed. I will probably support it once the documentation is up to FP standards. --Cart (talk) 14:39, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you, Cmao20 and Cart, for your thoughtful and constructive feedback. The conflicting category has been removed, and structured data has been updated. Given the location (Masai Mara), the characteristic striping, and the absence of other subspecies in the area, Equus quagga boehmi is the most accurate identification. If helpful, I would suggest renaming the file to: Three plains zebras (Equus quagga boehmi) in Masai Mara National Reserve, Kenya.jpg to better reflect the subject. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:52, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Addendum: I've now struck the filename suggestion from my comment - many thanks to Cart for already taking care of the rename. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:38, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support I will rename after nomination is over. Cmao20 (talk) 16:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• NB: Grant's zebras not Three plains zebras. The ssp. is correct. Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Thanks, Charles - correction noted and applied. Much appreciated! -- Radomianin (talk) 17:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Cmao20 Sorry for the delay because I don't have much time due to a lot of work, so the delay is inevitable. Kelly zhrm (talk) 15:49, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 20:48, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Osmo Lundell hey 08:21, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support That's better. And Cmao20, I've already fixed the name. --Cart (talk) 16:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Clear, well-composed image in natural habitat with excellent lighting. -- Radomianin (talk) 16:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support per Radomianin. Thanks to all of your for your concerted effort to improve filename, description and categories! – Aristeas (talk) 18:23, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support per Radomianin. --Harlock81 (talk) 08:24, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Weak oppose Level of detail is just ok, lighthing is fine but I'm not convinced about the compo. It looks like a randomed crop. I'd had rather left more space at the left than at the right. In addition I don't see any special behaviour (I'm thinking of something like this) Overall not an outstanding photo to me that deserves the star. Poco a poco (talk) 08:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:29, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2025 at 14:11:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Shells#Family : Cymatiidae
•  Info Gyrineum roseum is a small but beautiful representative of the Cymatiidae, the Rock whelks; created by Llez – uploaded by Llez – nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 14:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Llez (talk) 14:11, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 14:24, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 15:41, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Outstanding, as always - I could spend a while browsing your shell pictures for fun. Cmao20 (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support. Wow! JayCubby (talk) 00:20, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 11:30, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Like a summer dream ice-cream cone. --Cart (talk) 13:57, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:04, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support – Aristeas (talk) 18:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 19:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:09, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 08:25, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 08:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 13:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2025 at 01:46:06 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#United States
•  Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:46, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:46, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Nice abstract forms. But I can see some purple CA at full size. Not a deal breaker but it would be good if it can be removed. Cmao20 (talk) 19:03, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your review. Much appreciated. I uploaded a new version last night (in the first version I didn't correct for CA) – please check and let me know if there's anything else you'd like me to do. All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:00, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A lot better, thank you! Cmao20 (talk) 14:17, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Clearly composed, strong lines, technically precise; thanks for the update. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:53, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Cool and clear lines. --Cart (talk) 13:59, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:02, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support per Cart, Cmao20, and Radomianin. – Aristeas (talk) 18:24, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment The CA at the facade should be removed.--Ermell (talk) 22:12, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Although I couldn't find chromatic aberration, I cranked the defringe slider in Capture One to 100 and uploaded a new version. The Super Elmar 21mm f/3.4 is known for its extremely low chromatic aberration and distortion. Let's hope the new version works :-) --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 22:59, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Foster’s clients are willing to spend on curved glass; I’ve added the architect to the parent category. Acroterion (talk) 02:30, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2025 at 01:43:17 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#United States
•  Info created by Frank Schulenburg – uploaded by Frank Schulenburg – nominated by Frank Schulenburg --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:43, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:43, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 19:01, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Very interesting building, nice colours, skilful perspective/detail, good quality. – Aristeas (talk) 19:37, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Question - @Frank Schulenburg: Do you have photos of the interior of the church? From my reading - there are 1500 of the pictured small windows with stained glass inserts, which create a beautiful, colorful light play in the sanctuary. - ERcheck (talk) 03:14, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately not. My wife and I didn't have much time while visiting Palo Alto. Best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 05:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support --Cart (talk) 14:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:00, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support as per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 15:27, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support I will try to organize a category for that style of mosaic-like punched windows and credit the architect. Acroterion (talk) 02:37, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Acroterion, Trapezoid windows or something like that? --Cart (talk) 10:32, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  It's a modernist interpretation of plate tracery, but I'm not sure it's got a scholarly name in the modern version. Acroterion (talk) 12:06, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2025 at 20:43:36 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Others#Plants
•  Info created by Henri Matisse, digitized by Google, uploaded and nominated by Yann
•  Info Bowl of Apples on a Table, Henri Matisse, oil on canvas, 1916. 89.5 × 114.9 cm
•  Support Public domain since last January. No FP by Matisse yet. Only one FP of still-life paintings. Very high resolution. -- Yann (talk) 20:43, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:55, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment The description page should better use the {{Artwork}} template instead of the plain {{Information}} template. The collection should be mentioned not only via a category, but also in the description. There are no categories for the subject of the painting; at least Category:20th-century still-life paintings of fruit bowls, Category:Still-life paintings with apples and Category:Paintings of tables should be added, or whatever you consider as appropriate. From a more formal perspective, Category:1916 still-life paintings and Category:Paintings by Henri Matisse in the United States would be useful. – Aristeas (talk) 19:09, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Aristeas: I converted to {{Artwork}} and added some information. Thanks to Cmao20 for adding the categories. Yann (talk) 13:12, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

 Support Thank you very much, Yann and Cmao20. Now we can happily mark description and categories with OK (although only in our mind, since the checklist is gone). – Aristeas (talk) 16:37, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Юрий Д.К 20:32, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 05:31, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2025 at 18:19:21 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Order : Perciformes (Perch-like Fishes)
•  Info Moorish idol (Zanclus cornutus), Anilao, Philippines. It can be found from the eastern coast of Africa between Somalia and South Africa east to Hawaii and Easter Island. The Moorish idol lives between depths of 1–180 metres (3.3–590.6 ft) in turbid lagoons, reef flats, and clear rocky- and coral reefs. They mostly feed on sponges. Note: we have no FPs of the family Zanclidae. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:19, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:19, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 18:23, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Yann (talk) 20:48, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Striking underwater image. --Tagooty (talk) 05:12, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Llez (talk) 14:15, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Great shot, however categories were looking a bit sparse, I added a couple for you Poco a poco but it would be appreciated if you could add these ones in future underwater noms. Cmao20 (talk) 18:55, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--UnpetitproleX (Talk) 20:49, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support A little bit tight framed... --Cart (talk) 14:44, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:58, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Oppose Categories are incomplete, also missing location. There should be camera location and more specific category on location. --A.Savin 18:11, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Bullshit bingo review here: 1) cats are fine 2) coordinates is definitely not a must for FP 3) my camera has not GPS 4) GPS doesn't work under water + the camera is shielded within a case 5) nothing new, I just consider that this is a personal attack due to the fact that half of the noms here have no coordinates but you only seem to care about this one. Poco a poco (talk) 19:55, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Soll ich dir ein Geheimnis verraten? Bei mir funktioniert seit einem Jahr das Schreiben der Koordinaten auf EXIF auch nicht mehr. Und trotzdem lade ich so gut wie kein einziges Bild ohne exakte Koordinaten hoch. In den meisten Fällen kann man sich die Kamera-Position merken. Kann man das nicht, gibt es einen super billigen Trick: kurz vor oder nach dem Schießen des Fotos mit der Kamera ein Foto mit dem Smartphone machen und dessen Koordinaten dann nutzen. Außerdem sind ungefähre Koordinaten immernoch besser als gar keine. Außerdem hatte ich die Koordinaten nie verlangt als exklusive Bedingung. In diesem Fall ist es in Kombination mit unzureichenden Kategorien. Und da hatte ich offensichtlich Recht. Das als "personal attack" oder "Bullshit-Bingo Review" abzutun ist schon ziemlich armselig. Dein gewöhnliches Verhalten von vor Jahren, das sich null geändert hat. Du lernst einfach nichts dazu. Die fehlende Kategorie wurde hinzugefügt (nicht von dir, versteht sich — ist ja kein Job für eine Diva), ich bestehe nicht auf Koordinaten, wenn das denn so schwer sein soll, null und nichtig sind mithin deine Anschuldigungen. --A.Savin 11:52, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• There are several of us here trying to get the FP standard up to what it was before people started to become lazy and not care about proper documentation for FPs. The goal is to have the FPs in as good order as they were when Daniel Case was active here and help everyone with the categories. Perhaps you have forgotten how it looked back then. We are all dreading to comment on your photos because of your often bad temper when we do so. A.Savin is taking one for the team here, and I will back his request.

  It doesn't matter if your camera doesn't have GPS, none of mine do, but I usually remember where I've been and can give an approximate location on my photos. It doesn't need to be spot on, just a few decimals in the location coordinates per this. Having a cat like Category:Anilao, Iloilo (if that is the right place) would improve the cats, as well as Category:Nature of Iloilo (province) since that is the sort of categories where animals usually are.

  I'm really surprised at this, because you have no problem adding plenty of categories related to your travels, awards, and other personal categories, but you get red-hot mad when we ask you to add a couple more for the benefit of Commons and its users. As the user with the most FPs and an Admin, you should really be one of those who set a good example for what good documentation as per Commons recommendations is. Instead you are doing the opposite, doing just the very bare minimum and using your whale status here to intimidate anyone who dares to ask you to do what most of us others do. --Cart (talk) 21:03, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• Look, I've been around here for almost 2 decades. You don't need speak about "those old glory days". GPS coordinates have NEVER been a requirement for FP, so if you what that to be a requirement make a proposal and let everybody take part in it instead of abusing the process in this nomination trying to make a point.
• I'm not a lazy person, it is just not feasible for me to provide coordinates when you dive from a boat (what I usually do). I already lost an expensive cell phone when taking it with me to such a trip, so I'm not willing to do that anymore. Ships move around and you dive here and there, there is often no way for me to determine a more accurate location that what the category provides. Btw, I've added an additional category for Anilao underwater pictures. So, I hope that issue is none by now.
• Like you I am concerned about the standard here but what I consider even more important about the standard of the images shown here. I feel often like a Don Quixote here because most people support images because they like them but IMHO that wow element and the quality requirements are higher. So, from my point of view I'm the one dreading lots of noms that say nothing to me and get a bunch of supporting votes.
• I don't have bad temper but feel that I have to react when I am treated unfairly like here. Are you now the voice of the community allowing yourself to affirm that "We are all dreading to comment on your photos because of your often bad temper when we do so."? Seriously?
• The one who feels intimidated and attacked here is me and I'm thinking about not participating here, or worse thinking about not uploading any stuff if I know upfront that it cannot fulfill absurd requirements. Why do you care about personal categories now (yet an attack)? those are useful (at least to me) and easy to determine.
• Yet a proof of your unfair conduct. You have extensively commented on the issues of this nom above (the first nom I looked into where you gave feedback). You seem to be happy with "Ecuador" as location. No area, no park, no city, just a country. But here you expect a GPS coordinate. That makes sense.
• I'd think twice before keeping pushing hard and pillorying people before it's too late. Apart from the fact, that these matters should be discussed somewhere else. Poco a poco (talk) 08:03, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for adding a better location category. That was very kind of you and perfectly adequate.

No, the FP rules do not state explicitly that GPS coordinates should be added, but the Commons recommendations in general are that we should give as much information as we can about photos. Info about photos increase their value and usefulness on all wiki projects. That includes as good location as we can get, and that should also be present in FPs. For some photos it's near impossible to get full info, especially those uploaded from Flickr, and we must make do with what we have. Photographers who are also users here can provide much more info, so more is expected of them. But on the other hand, photos made by users can also get awarded the QI, which imported photos can't. What is so wrong with providing what knowledge you have about a photo, when it's beneficial to all, what is so "unfair" about that?

I am not the voice of the entire community, but I get my fair share of thanks, comments and emails to know that I'm not alone in wanting things to change for the better on FPC for the sake of the overall quality of the site.

"I'm thinking about not participating here, or worse thinking about not uploading any stuff" - Well, we've heard that before. It's what you always say as soon as someone says something you don't like. That is what other users before me has referred to as your Diva statements. And you have left in a huff before, but always come back because this is for better or worse the community you like and want to be a part of. Voices get raised here too like in most families and communities, but in the end we get along anyway.

Bad temper? Yes, you lashed out at A.Savin in the comment above, and you have threatened me in the text above: "I'd think twice before...". So Q.E.D. Are you going to block me for wanting you to improve the documentation on your photos?

You feel like Don Quixote, really? He saw enemies and felt threatened when there were none, and lived in a fantasy world where he fought windmills believing them to be monsters. No one is persecuting you, that is all in your head, we just want you to add better categories. But you are prone to blowing things out of proportion and make big things out of small, so maybe the comparison is true. --Cart (talk) 09:40, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

No, if your voice is the community's as you defend, this is definitely not the community I like and want to be a part of. That community can thank you that you now that it will see no single new picture of this user anymore in the project. It's over. Poco a poco (talk) 10:27, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Right, blame me for your bad temper. Very nice. One of the times you quit "for good" never to come back, you went on a round trip to Spain and came back with enough photos to win almost everything in WLM Spain that year. I'm looking forward to what photos you bring back this time. --Cart (talk) 10:36, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Cart, what I will do is posting here links of my pictures on external platforms, where I will not have to stand bullshit like this and will even get a financial compensation. Your words just make my determination stronger. Time will be the judge here. Poco a poco (talk) 11:15, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, if you are so determined, just don't forget to resign your admin status when you leave. But my advice is that you hang on to it so you'll have it when you return after cooling off for a while. Perhaps you will realize that I'm not your enemy and I don't ask for any unrealistic big undertaking, just add categories and locations, and don't blow up over it.

Btw, if you are starting to sell your photos ("financial compensation") rather than uploading them here, I don't think you can post links to them here because Commons does not allow advertising for commercial sites that way. --Cart (talk) 11:48, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Cart, I agree with Poco here. Please do not try patronizing others. Thanks, Yann (talk) 13:37, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for that insight Yann, I will take it to heart. --Cart (talk) 13:45, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment Just a quiet thought I'd like to offer: Both of you have contributed immensely to what makes Commons such a valuable and vibrant place - each with your own strengths and long-standing dedication. It would be a real loss to see either of you step back. Perhaps, even in disagreement, there's still room for mutual understanding or simply a pause. I truly hope we can find a way forward that honours both your voices. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:22, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Relax Radomianin, I'm not going anywhere. There is work to do here even though I don't have any new photos to nominate at the moment. I might be less active for a few days, but that is because it's Midsummer this long weekend. In Sweden that's a bigger holiday than Christmas. So Happy Solstice to all of you! --Cart (talk) 12:33, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I don't think running away gives satisfaction. It's better to give each other some space for different insights. It's never completely yes or no,--Famberhorst (talk) 16:10, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• I can and want only to second Radomianin’s honest words. I share his hope. Commons has room enough for both of you, Cart and Poco, it needs both of you, and I am sure we all appreciate the work of both of you very much. Happy midsummer! – Aristeas (talk) 17:11, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2025 at 16:24:56 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class : Scyphozoa
•  Info created by Mozzihh – uploaded by Mozzihh – nominated by Mozzihh -- Mozzihh (talk) 16:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Mozzihh (talk) 16:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment - Image looks good, but categorization is lacking. Is there nothing for the species (are they even identified)?  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:42, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment I've fixed up the categories for you, please check them out so you can do it yourself the next time. The file name is borderline with little specifics and a bewildering number. --Cart (talk) 17:21, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thanks for fixing! File name is from my archive... Mozzihh (talk) 19:18, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose While the jellies are very pretty and the rather too much black space in the photo can be cropped, I think the quality is too low, especially for an aquarium shot. Some might be salvaged by better editing from the raw (if such exists), but as it is now, I'm not too impressed. Sory. --Cart (talk) 18:41, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you for the hints, I did some raw editing and cropping. I hope it's more impressing now. Mozzihh (talk) 20:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The crop is good for me, but the edit might unfortunately have made it worse. It's "blotchy" now. Sorry. --Cart (talk) 21:54, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support --Osmo Lundell hey 18:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Weak oppose Interesting subject but sorry, poor quality at full size (low detail and unsharp). Cmao20 (talk) 18:52, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Weak oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 08:35, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2025 at 10:33:15 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asterales#Subfamily : Asteroideae
•  Info created by Osmo Lundell – uploaded by Osmo Lundell – nominated by Osmo Lundell --Osmo Lundell hey 10:33, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- --Osmo Lundell hey 10:33, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment Gallery fixed. If a gallery link you make is red, then there is something wrong with it and you need to check it out. Go to the gallery pages and find the right one, plus the right section heading on that page and simply copy it. A little info about where this photo was taken, and is it wild or cultivated, should also be in the description and categories. Would you please add that. Best, --Cart (talk) 11:19, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I checked the diff, didn't notice the category was empty while posting from a mobile device. I'll add info of when the photo was taken soon. --Osmo Lundell hey 14:38, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Added details on where the photo was taken. Hatanpää mansion has a private owned garden that is open to the public in Tampere. Technical details on the camera body and lens aren't that important, atleast according to the policy, but I can provide them if someone is interested. The composition was edited in Lightroom. --Osmo Lundell hey 17:21, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Now we are getting somewhere, but the idea was that you should have added the place for the flower on the file page, not just here, since this page will be archived out of sight for most of the general public as soon as the nomination is over and the info will be lost. I've copied it for you and added the relevant categories too. A plant photo without a good location is almost useless for Commons, so please take a look at what I've done so you can do the same the next time. :)

  So since this was in a garden, I assume that the flower was planted and not wild. Or? In that case it should be in the 'Doronicum orientale (cultivars)' category and not the general category for the wild plants.

  Regarding info about the camera you used: Yes, we are very interested in the equipment used for a photo. We usually find that in the photos EXIF, but if you don't keep that with your photos you can also use the Template:Photo Information and add to the description on the file page. Having the tech specs is useful for people learning how to take good photos, and it also allows voters to see how well you have used the cameras capacity. That can be very useful when providing feedback on your photos and perhaps give hints and tips. I know this is a lot to take in for a "newbie", but this is the Big League for photos on Commons, so everything is the next level from just uploading photos for wikis. --Cart (talk) 17:45, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The plants in the garden were planted, yes. I took the exif and other metadata out, because there was too much info I didn't want to be there and stripping it straight out was easier than cherrypicking them out of the ~200 or so pics I took on that tour.
  It's not a lot to take at all! I'll go add the deets you asked. ^^ --Osmo Lundell hey 17:52, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you! Plant category fixed. --Cart (talk) 18:12, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose Low quality (noise, halos/CA along the petal edges); not an appealing composition; missing EXIF. Overall, much below the bar of the many images in the FP Gallery. --Tagooty (talk) 05:18, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hey! Thank you for your detailed opinion. If I understood you correctly, re-editing the original would make the picture better for you? Could you elaborate bit further on that? --Osmo Lundell hey 08:13, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose Sorry but I can see a lot of JPEG artefacts at full size and I am not sure I like how the harsh light means that the flowers just appear to be floating in mid air, it isn't a very satisfying composition for me. I think this picture is QI and was worth a try but I don't see it as FP. Cmao20 (talk) 18:51, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hi! Could you explain what you mean by "JPEG artefacts at full size"? :D --Osmo Lundell hey 19:02, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Oppose per Tagooty and Cmao20. Like I recommended you before, since you are new here, you should nominate your photos at COM:QIC first to get all photo-technical issues sorted out first. When an image appear here it should be in tip-top shape. This is not a photo workshop, even if it often turns into one, especially for new participants. --Cart (talk) 14:52, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Hey, thanks for your opinion Cart! Could you elaborate further on the said photo-technical issues? The users you mensioned above didn't explicitly rule out what they thought was the issue in a comprehensible way. --Osmo Lundell hey 19:01, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I see now that you and your photo are in the very capable hands of Aristeas, and I suggest to take a good look at any of the edits he will do to your photo. That will be more instructive than any words alone can be. Also, the users above are very specific about what can be improved in the photo. There is a page here with explanations for the photo language we use here at FPC: COM:PT. You might want to read it. --Cart (talk) 19:54, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Indeed, I'm exited how Aristeas can pimp the image. Sidenote: I hope that the language used in FP will be sufficiently specific to indicate the areas of the image that might need work. If not by screenshots or coordinates within the image, then at the very least by using comprehensible and clear language, enabling at least an above-average photographer to respond to the provided feedback. I agree that the upcoming revision of the edit by Aristeas will likely be more helpful than just a comment (which is understandable, since FP is not a DIY club as you mentioned). Clear communication is super important for making the community of any Wiki-project more inclusive and active, especially for those who aren’t actively participating in FP nominations, which is exactly what we want, right? --Osmo Lundell hey 21:03, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The communication you are searching for is usually taking place at the COM:QIC, that is sort of the prepping area for FPC. There is also the COM:CRIT for more feedback. We review thousands of photos here, so very few of us have the stamina to be as detailed as you would like us to be. This is only your second try, and we are being patient with you and giving you advice. I suggest you take them. It's always better to be a bit involved in the community here on Commons before jumping into FPC. --Cart (talk) 21:41, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No no, I ment as a general rule of thumb in any wiki process and basically in anything in life, if you can write it better and more clearly, you should do so! It doesn't take nearly that much effort as one might think at first. And again thanks for your comments! --Osmo Lundell hey 22:25, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment However I am bound to say that in my eyes the composition is actually very good – the flowers nicely stand out before the background of the OOF leaves, and are also nicely framed by them. I would try to crop ~ 90 pixels from the left margin to remove the fragments of two cropped leaves. In my eyes the brightness (too dark) and the halos at some petals are the main problems. @Osmo: I cannot promise too much, as I don’t know the quality of the original image data. But if you could give me access to the original image file (i.e., the raw image file, if available, or the original JPEG file from the camera), I could try to edit it and forward the result to you; sometimes I am lucky and can get a better result ;–). Best, – Aristeas (talk) 18:17, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  Thank you @Aristeas! Definetly, could you send me an email through my userpage? I can send you the original raw with the same license as this one (CC-BY-SA-4)! Thanks for offering your help, means a lot!! --Osmo Lundell hey 18:58, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Done Thank you, I have sent you an e-mail. Best, – Aristeas (talk) 19:54, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  No prob mate! Take your time, we can renom this if the deadline passes and ifwhen your edit blows me away ^^ That image also has the fixed EXIF, which Cart was asking for earlier. --Osmo Lundell hey 21:05, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2025 at 22:13:32 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Historical/People#1860-1869
•  Info created by JayCubby – uploaded by JayCubby – nominated by JayCubby -- JayCubby (talk) 22:13, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Good portrait of a notable individual -- JayCubby (talk) 22:13, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Nice. Why not making a JPEG version? --Yann (talk) 20:26, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Yann, fair point.  Done at File:Samuel Morse portrait.jpg. JayCubby (talk) 22:57, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support Good quality. Cmao20 (talk) 18:50, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Kelly zhrm (talk) 02:48, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 04:06, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2025 at 14:27:26 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Maps#Maps of Africa
•  Info Physical Map of Africa. Created by Tom Patterson – uploaded and nominated by Riad Salih (talk) 14:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support -- Riad Salih (talk) 14:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment There are several mistakes regarding some names in Italy, that are reported in Italian (some of them with typoes), and not in English: Golfo di Cagliari --> Gulf of Cagliari; Golfo di Taranto --> Gulf of Taranto; Golfo di Salerno (Gulfo is a typo) --> Gulf of Salerno; Puglia --> Apulia; Isole Pelagie --> Pelagie Islands; Calabriaa (typo) --> Calabria.
  The capes are named in Italian, but this can be ok (Capo Spartivento, Capo Rizzuto, Capo Passero and Capo Santa Maria di Leuca), since there are other in northern Africa that are in French; otherwise, you may use Cape Spartivento, Cape Rizzuto (not frequent), Cape Passero, and Cape Santa Maria di Leuca. --Harlock81 (talk) 10:47, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  If someone is able to open the source file in Adobe Illustrator, they might be able to correct those inaccuracies. Riad Salih (talk) 14:10, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I used to have an Adobe Illustrator license, but do not have it anymore (using Inkscape instead; unfortunately Inkscape cannot convert this AI file). If somebody still has a license, could they please download the AI file and convert it to SVG format. First, because SVG is an open standard for vector graphics and can be uploaded directly to Commons; second, because then we could easily fix any typos etc. Of course the fonts are a problem; the map uses a proprietary font family (Myriad Pro), to allow the community to edit the file we would have to replace it by a font family which is available under a free (libre) license, preferably under OFL. If somebody could convert the file to a valid SVG, I would try to replace the fonts and to fix the typos. – Aristeas (talk) 08:07, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment Could you please transfer some data from the source to the file page on Commons, such as how and when the map was made. Even physical features change with time. --Cart (talk) 11:34, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  I did Riad Salih (talk) 14:05, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Comment The source website offers two versions: the medium-quality and the high-quality file. This is the medium-quality version. But IMHO we should use the high-quality file because it allows for much more possible use cases. It’s exactly the same image, just in higher resolution. (One can always downscale a raster image, but upscaling it is much more difficult and problematic.) No problem, we can simply upload it over the current (medium-quality) image. Please do so. – Aristeas (talk) 13:33, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  @Aristeas I attempted to open and upload the high quality file, but my internet speed and PC capabilities are somewhat limited. Please feel free to upload the high version if you can. Riad Salih (talk) 14:01, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

   Done Uploaded the high-quality file. Looking at the Exif data they say that the image uses “uncalibrated” colours; this means normally that the file uses the Adobe RGB color space, but the profile was not embedded, this causes wrong display (too muted colours). I have embedded the AdobeRGB profile with ExifTool, i.e. without any quality loss. Now the colours look a bit different, but IMHO quite reasonable and more like in common physical maps. – Aristeas (talk) 15:24, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

•  Support --Yann (talk) 15:59, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Юрий Д.К 20:33, 18 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Nylki (talk) 09:54, 19 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2025 at 11:27:47 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

• Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Canada
•  Info Willistead Manor, a manor house in Windsor, Ontario, designed by Albert Kahn for the Walker family. This 36-room house, completed in 1906, is in the Tudor-Jacobean style. All by Crisco 1492 --  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 11:27, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Юрий Д.К 14:17, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Kritzolina 14:46, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 21:29, 15 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --Llez (talk) 09:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:03, 16 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Comment I like it. Lifting the shadows a bit would be an improvement, though. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 01:37, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Frank Schulenburg, I've increased the shadows by another 35. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:22, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
•  Support Much better. --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 10:32, 17 June 2025 (UTC)[reply