Please cut and paste new entries to the bottom of this page, creating a new monthly archive (by closing date) when necessary.
For promoted entries, add {{VPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} to the bottom of the entry, replacing FILENAME.JPG with the file that was promoted.
For entries not promoted, add {{VPCresult|Not promoted| }} to the bottom of the entry.
Do NOT put any other information inside the template. It should be copied and pasted exactly, and only the first one should have FILENAME.JPG replaced with the actual filename.
This is a high EV image. After viewing
File:Le chateau de Vaux le Vicomte.jpg, I realized that you don't have to have a blue sky for a VP. I would do a perspective correction, but fear I would lose the sculpture on the far right.
This is a unique image depicting a rare
Saks Fifth Avenue on the
Magnificent Mile that has men's and women's stores across the street from each other. It adds EV to a variety of articles for this reason.
This is a high EV image. In fact, I have been contacted for permission to include a derivative of it in a publication. In it's prior nomination it had three supports (Myself,
Elekhh and
Raeky (conditional)) and no opposes and generally four supports passes.
Support Edit3 (file name Edit2) As previously, "a very good illustration of green roof, used in several related important articles". --
Elekhh (
talk) 06:41, 3 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Support Edit preferably, but any version.--
Babybambam (
talk) 03:23, 25 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Which Edit? Theres 2 Edits there
Spongie555 (
talk) 05:48, 26 September 2010 (UTC)reply
I don't see much difference, but the first is fine.--
Babybambam (
talk) 17:45, 26 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Although right now only Boren has an article because no one like to write offensive lineman articles, this may be an illustration of a bunch of future professional athletes.
Support catches the silhouette perfectly, and thus the image is clear even at small size as used in many articles. --
Elekhh (
talk) 12:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Sydney opera house side view.jpg --
Spongie555 (
talk) 00:21, 6 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose Standard staged shot, nothing outsanding to me. Does not reveal anything about her personality... --
Elekhh (
talk) 23:06, 3 September 2010 (UTC)reply
One of the
arguments there was that is the first time that an official presidential portrait was taken with a digital camera. --
Elekhh (
talk) 03:15, 5 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Ya but i dont mind stage shots of politicans beacuse they are supposed to be looking offical(now most picture show them smiling which i dont mind either).
Spongie555 (
talk) 00:26, 6 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support This is a good image of her.--
Babybambam (
talk) 17:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)reply
SupportEdge3 (
talk) 16:24, 16 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment The sky is pretty noisy. Also, this photo was taken during building repairs—there are no hands on the clock, and there is scaffolding on the south wall. —
Jeremy (
talk) 05:07, 19 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Despite the support, I am considering withdrawing for the reasons mentioned.--
TonyTheTiger (
T/
C/
BIO/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:FOUR) 12:39, 19 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Support It is a nice picture. If you want to withdraw it you can but you should let this one be promoted and if you come by with a better one we can delist and replace.
Spongie555 (
talk) 01:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Wrigley Building - Chicago, Illinois.JPG --
Spongie555 (
talk) 03:11, 6 October 2010 (UTC)reply
It is a good picture of her. It was featured on Turkish Wikipedia and Commons and is a quality and valued image on commons. It does cut off her arm alittle.
Very good quality for its time. Probably wont pass FP beacuse it has low EV and the person in the image isnt that notable but its amazing quality for a picture in 1850. It does have EV of showing a daguerreotype taken by Southworth and Hawes
Commment you should have done this enough times by now to know to complete all the steps in a nomination. Can you spot what's missing on this one?
BencherliteTalk 13:11, 28 September 2010 (UTC)reply
How about a caption for the image, providing adequate context for voters on WP:VPC, instead of the one there at present: "a caption for the image, providing adequate context for voters on WP:VPC"?
BencherliteTalk 13:27, 28 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose not outstanding EV, very tightly framed and part of building cropped. --
Elekhh (
talk) 03:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)reply
I know we have a featured picture of him but for example we have a FP of Obama but we have alot of VP of him anyway.
Spongie555 (
talk) 03:07, 20 September 2010 (UTC)reply
The whole point of valued pictures is that the pictures are valuable. Why's this one valuable? Where's the EV?
J Milburn (
talk) 12:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)reply
It is valuable beacuse it is a good quality image of him. VP is less harsh about the EV then FP is.
Spongie555 (
talk) 01:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Which demonstrates in one how this project has failed. The whole point of VP was to award high value images which were not of the quality needed for FP.
J Milburn (
talk) 01:40, 22 September 2010 (UTC)reply
I guess the argument here is that it presents the subject with a more natural facial expression, unlike the somewhat crisp FP (which has more info about the details of the skin and hair), hence its use in the article as well. However I am not convinced of it being
among Wikipedia's most educational work. "It has EV" is clearly not sufficient. --
Elekhh (
talk) 03:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)reply
High EV, good quality also i like how the background is the russian flag. Also i think offical portraits are ok like in example
File:Official portrait of Barack Obama.jpg
Support Well framed image and dynamic composition, with good EV (in Michigan Avenue Bridge) illustrating the movement of the bridge. --
Elekhh (
talk) 02:58, 4 October 2010 (UTC)reply
High ev as lead image in main article. Its a nice picture. Also this is very high up so those white stuff in the top right are clouds(or fog). What was suprising for me that they could build a a building on a side of mountain.
Support most iconic and educational image, and beautiful into the deal! Harriastalk 16:03, 10 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support well illustrates the building ensemble, and in particular the location (altitude and weather). It also looks good, making the viewer want to know more. --
Elekhh (
talk) 04:02, 13 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support I don't mind the trees beacuse it looks like winter. Also it has high ev in Washington square park article as it's lead image.
Spongie555 (
talk) 21:51, 7 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support very well chosen perspective with the branches covering up the tall buildings behind the library. The image showing the diverse activities on the square in front of the library also adds EV. It's a shame it has several technical issues (overexposured sky, bottom left corner of the building cropped). --
Elekhh (
talk) 04:11, 13 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support It's educational, and the quality is fine. The don't really mind the trees either.
Clementina♈ 00:47, 16 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Washington Square Park & Newberry Library.JPG --
Spongie555 (
talk) 19:10, 16 October 2010 (UTC)reply
An animation showing the trajectory taken (from above) of a typical off break delivery in cricket. The image is, in my opinion, of very high educational value: indeed, I have to refer frequently to these animations to remind myself which sort of spin bowler delivers which sort of ball. There is an alternative, larger image at
File:Off break.gif
Support as nominator --Harriastalk 22:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment I dont know how to rate a animation so if anyone wants to help. Also i dont know Cricket so can anyone help with the Cricket nominations just to see if they are good.
Spongie555 (
talk) 02:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support another family picture like the penguins. High ev as it's lead image on southern giant pertal article. Also I'm suprised this was taken in 1999.
Spongie555 (
talk) 02:28, 7 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support perfect framing and focus, I don't know why is so noisy, nevertheless a compelling illustration of the bird. --
Elekhh (
talk) 04:19, 13 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support an educational and pleasing picture. Rather noisy, and some of the colors might be a bit distracting, but overall, it's enough for me to support. :)
Clementinatalk 03:12, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Giant petrel with chicks.jpg --
I'ḏ♥One 19:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Neutral Probably the best shot of him on Wiki, but I just don't find it outstanding enough. For such a public (and rather static) figure I can imagine that even better images are possible and might become available. On the other hand I am no expert on this topic. -
Elekhh (
talk) 06:32, 14 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support clear image, fine depiction.
Nergaal (
talk) 02:43, 15 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Pope Benedictus XVI january,20 2006 (2) mod.jpg --
I'ḏ♥One 21:05, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Weak support - the fish in the background are blurry, it's not good enough to meet featured picture standards, the closeup is clear enough though. I'd have no problems if the fish in the background were sharper. —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? •
1:24pm • 03:24, 30 September 2010 (UTC)reply
Weak support Very good illustration of all three articles, but the quality could be better indeed. --
Elekhh (
talk) 03:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Weak Support per above. But I like the vibrant colors.
Spongie555 (
talk) 23:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support nice contrast.
Nergaal (
talk) 02:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support per all above.
Acather96 (
talk) 20:12, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
The only non-zoo image on Wikipedia of the
critically endangered Sumatran Rhinoceros (population less than 300). Compelling and engaging frontal shot, making the viewer want to know more.
Support as nominator --
Elekhh (
talk) 01:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support per nominator. But I don't like that leaf covering the nose but other then that it's fine.
Spongie555 (
talk) 06:33, 17 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support --
I'ḏ♥One 19:44, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Strong Support High EV, fantastic photo with brilliant colour. I can live with the leaf :)
Acather96 (
talk) 19:48, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Sumatran Rhinoceros Way Kambas 2008.jpg --
Acather96 (
talk) 18:55, 19 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Copyright by Kaufmann, Weimer & Fabry Co, Chicago; restored and alternate versions by
Smalljim (
talk·contribs) at the Graphics Lab
Support as nominator As a pano, the curvature does not bother me and thus, I mildly prefer the original, but support both. --
TonyTheTiger (
T/
C/
BIO/
WP:CHICAGO/
WP:FOUR) 19:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support the second one.
Spongie555 (
talk) 23:59, 11 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support compelling detailed view of historic Chicago. Slight preference for retouched original. --
Elekhh (
talk) 12:19, 12 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support I kind of like the non-curvature one, but the pixelation is quite annoying. Therefore I don't have a preference.
Nergaal (
talk) 02:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support both Both have high EV, no real preference.
Acather96 (
talk) 20:03, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose I find images of buildings under construction educative when they reveal the building structure, construction methods and developing shape. But this image, while a nice composition, is of low resolution and is also blurred, so that the details of the structure are not visible. --
Elekhh (
talk) 12:00, 5 October 2010 (UTC)reply
An animation showing the trajectory taken (from above) of a typical leg break delivery spin cricket. The image is, in my opinion, of very high educational value. There is an alternative, larger image at
File:Leg spin.gif
Support only as a set with the one below. They are the same except mirrored, so I see no reason not to merge the noms (and the parent articles also).
Nergaal (
talk) 08:47, 21 October 2010 (UTC)reply
VP doesnt really do sets but if we do then it has to be presented as a set instead of seperete nominations.
Spongie555 (
talk) 03:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)reply
An animation showing the trajectory taken (from above) of the stock delivery of a left-arm orthodox bowler in cricket. The image is, in my opinion, of very high educational value. There is an alternative, larger image at
File:Slow left arm.gif
Support as nominator --Harriastalk 09:57, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support High EV, good animation.
Acather96 (
talk) 19:37, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support VP does need some animations promoted especially ones like this with EV.
Spongie555 (
talk) 23:56, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
How is this different from the one just promoted? Instead of left it is right... I don't get why would these two not form a set, AND the two articles merged into one.
Nergaal (
talk) 08:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment Very nice. The source site
indicates that upon request higher resolution image might be available... would be worth a try. --
Elekhh (
talk) 01:43, 17 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support otherwise. --
Elekhh (
talk) 01:42, 27 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support Worth a go trying to get the hi-res version as well.
Acather96 (
talk) 19:50, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment I think images of fruits have highest EV when show multiple aspects, i.e. exterior and interior like
here. --
Elekhh (
talk) 12:25, 5 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Nergaal. --
Elekhh (
talk) 23:46, 2 November 2010 (UTC)reply
Support very nice, some EV here.
Acather96 (
talk) 20:13, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Weak Support Looks ok to me.
Spongie555 (
talk) 04:01, 22 October 2010 (UTC)reply
It may not be the best quality but the critera says EV is counted over quality. It is a very rare film since film wasnt used till 1888 making this a very early film since he died in 1898
Since this was taken in around 1888-1898 it would be hard to find good quality film till years later.
Spongie555 (
talk) 03:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support I would guess it has a good EV somewhere in the early part of
History of film.
Nergaal (
talk) 00:13, 15 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Weak Support per Nergaal.
Acather96 (
talk) 19:51, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose Its EV in
Otto von Bismarck is doubtable. A low quality video of Bismarck removing his hat (not a special action) does not add much to the article. A good quality still photo of Bismarck better illustrates him. --
RedtigerxyzTalk 16:40, 26 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose Does not provide much knowledge either about the
building volume (only one façade, partially visible) nor the
urban context. Not among Wikipedia's most educational work IMO. --
Elekhh (
talk) 12:11, 12 October 2010 (UTC)reply
This staged image of Sammy Woods was among the iconic images of the time, and has been used as the lead image on
Sammy Woods since March 2010. In a time when photos of the players in action were rare, if not completely non-existant, these staged images were all that the public had to recognise cricketers by.
This bridge is a
Chicago Landmark and this is a high quality image. Taken from the west it compliments the
WP:VPICS that was just promoted from the east with the bridge raised
Oppose Nice, clear image, but find
File:Michigan Ave Bridge 060415.jpg significantly more educative, as it demonstrates the functioning of the bridge. --
Elekhh (
talk) 11:52, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Support This is educational in its own right, I might never know people can walk over it from the other image. --
I'ḏ♥One 19:46, 18 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Oppose EV not outstanding: too low resolution to illustrate façade detail, tightly framed frontal view does not illustrate building volume and site context. --
Elekhh (
talk) 02:49, 4 October 2010 (UTC)reply
It is the lead image in the article.
Spongie555 (
talk) 03:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)reply
Comment I think the building on the left is distracting. I think that was a one of the reasons it failed FP as i remember.
Spongie555 (
talk) 02:32, 14 October 2010 (UTC)reply