Support as nominator –
kallerna 17:46, 21 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Weak support – very nice view, but would be a lot better if more runways on left were shown, an example
here.
Bammesk (
talk) 01:49, 22 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Even missed the cool tower. ---
Coffeeand
crumbs 13:46, 22 November 2019 (UTC)reply
The cool tower being the
Turning Torso that one sees on the approach path? It's not even in the same country! But it is cool, and nearby. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 22:52, 22 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
Tomer T (
talk) 18:58, 24 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. It's a nice and high-quality image of Lake Louise but we have many of those and I don't think it's the nicest one even on the Lake Louise article let alone in
Commons:Category:Lake Louise. The high point of view leads to an awkward composition and makes the hazed-out background look plain; the actual background as seen from the ground at Lake Louise is far from plain. And because it's just one of many, and not the lead image in its article (nor should it be), the EV is not very high. Also, the foreground is blurred and there's a technical issue (a seam in the stitching marked by a dashed line) in the upper right corner. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 19:41, 24 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. --
Gnosis (
talk) 22:29, 24 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – it has the stitching problem per David, also three dashed stitch lines in the sky area, left of center (the brightness of the blue sky is a bit irregular there as well).
Bammesk (
talk) 01:24, 25 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose per David and Bammesk.
Geoffroi 03:14, 25 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. --
Gnosis (
talk) 15:56, 25 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support while not aesthetically striking, the image is encyclopedic, and it's good to see another underwater photograph. ↠Pine(✉) 07:39, 3 December 2019 (UTC)'reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 Dec 2019 at 09:31:59 (UTC)
10 Zlotych
25 Zlotych
50 Zlotych
100 Zlotych
Reason
High EV, high quality images of a high grade first issue banknotes.
One of them was featured here before. If one of them is featured, I see no reasons not to nominate the rest, despite the fact two of banknotes are missing from a complete set.
Support as nominator –
Andrei (
talk) 09:31, 25 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support It's interesting that the cut-off tops are an early security measure. It'd be cool to see one with the matching top.
Geoffroi 21:11, 26 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. I know some people got a little bored of these banknote images, but they strike me as excellent candidates.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 18:18, 29 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
Editor-1 (
talk) 06:40, 26 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment – it needs a restoration.
Bammesk (
talk) 04:14, 28 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. I'm not really sold, I'm afraid. Does this really help readers understand the idea of a physical examination? Would a contemporary photograph not be better? The fact that you propose that it's included in history categories when it's being used as the primary illustration of a very real and very current medical term is revealing.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 18:16, 29 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose per JM, I think a modern photo showing a closer view of an examination would give us the EV that this one doesn't.
Geoffroi 20:40, 29 November 2019 (UTC)reply
The image quality is high, but this image isn't used in the article body, only in a gallery of 20 or so images (I'm pretty sure the MOS prohibits galleries). Not sure about EV.
Geoffroi 20:59, 26 November 2019 (UTC)reply
This picture is now in the article main body.
Alborzagros (
talk) 10:59, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
I didn't realize it was only used in a gallery. Striking my support vote.
Geoffroi 20:34, 29 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support – but only used in a gallery, can that be improved? and maybe some text addressing the dry! river?
Bammesk (
talk) 04:10, 28 November 2019 (UTC)reply
This picture is now in the article main body.
Alborzagros (
talk) 10:58, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Subject image, though technically OK, is unremarkable and of scant visual interest. Pic. (with artificial studio BG) and the brief article seem largely promotional, lacking significance or EV. Not appropriate for Main Page. –
Sca (
talk) 15:00, 27 November 2019 (UTC)reply
She's the mayor of the third biggest city in Israel, and the first female in this role, certainly notable.
Tomer T (
talk) 20:53, 27 November 2019 (UTC)reply
... in Israel perhaps. Looks like an official photo. –
Sca (
talk) 23:10, 27 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Please explain to users involved here why a static photo of Einat Kalisch-Rotem would be of interest to a sizeable portion of Main Page readers of the English-language Wikipedia. – 'Bye. –
Sca (
talk) 15:05, 28 November 2019 (UTC)reply
I already did.
Tomer T (
talk) 20:46, 28 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. Much more interesting that Sca's references to the real and definitely not made up
featured picture criterion #17: "must be of interest to a sizeable portion of Main Page readers of the English language Wikipedia".
Josh Milburn (
talk) 18:14, 29 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose Regarding picture quality, I have to agree with Sca. While this is a very useful photo of a notable person, it's a fairly stock-standard promo photo which gives no hint at all as to why we have an article on her. A high quality photo of Dr Kalisch-Rotem doing something or in a setting associated with the reason for her notability would be vastly superior.
Nick-D (
talk) 21:40, 29 November 2019 (UTC)reply
SupportTomer T has convinced me. I can not see how it is technically different from, for example,
File:Théophile Thoré by Nadar.jpg (which seems to be the main argument against). This is a studio portrait indeed, but it is made far more dramatic than all those official portraits (many of them have QI status) --
Andrei (
talk) 00:04, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Support It has the modern standard blue-grey background, but that's far less distracting than the cheesy American flag background a lot of the American politicians get, and, frankly, I think we're often way too harsh. If it's an action shot, like
Fannie Lou Hamer, we object to the pose not being perfect; if it's staged, we object it's staged. What do we expect? Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.3% of all
FPs 09:14, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Comparing modern photos to early portraits like that is a bit odd. It was very difficult to take photos outside a studio setting in the 1850s due to the limits of the technology at the time, and even then subjects had to sit or stand very still. We happily don't have that problem any more!
Nick-D (
talk) 10:18, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
I Support. Good quality. Notable personality. DreamSparrowChat 19:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator—kallerna 13:56, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose Looks like a standard vacation photo. The light is harsh afternoon sunlight. For real EV, we need a photo that focuses directly on the animal/s in more favorable light.
Geoffroi 23:16, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment This one shows also the typical landscape and architecture of Faroe Islands - I would say it adds the EV.
—kallerna 06:38, 2 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - I don't contest the EV, but unfortunately the composition is a bit messy, with the front sheep "touching" the one in the back. A slightly different angle might have helped. --
Janke |
Talk 09:30, 2 December 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Janke: What makes me wonder about this is that it covers both the animals and the town. If the photographer moved forward, and got past the animals, he or she could probably get an FP or a QI quality photo of the town. An isolated photo of the animals close-up would have better EV.
Geoffroi 01:10, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Per Geoffroi, Janke. A more narrowly focused shot of the foreground animal would be better. –
Sca (
talk) 15:42, 5 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose I do not like the composition.
Taewangkorea (
talk) 22:35, 6 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
Tomer T (
talk) 23:11, 30 November 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose The pose of the subject is haphazard, and the background is busy and unattractive (the man sitting behind him, the hose, etc).
Geoffroi 23:25, 1 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – EV not apparent. –
Sca (
talk) 15:09, 6 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose. It's great that we have this picture, but it does not strike me as a professional-quality portrait.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 09:52, 8 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2019 at 09:59:26 (UTC)
Reason
We don't see many law-related pictures at FPC at all. This one's an FP on Commons. I've read the objections, and having been there myself can attest to the difficulty of getting this shot.
Promoted File:Supreme Court of the United Kingdom, Court 1 Interior, London, UK - Diliff.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 10:54, 14 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator – ↠Pine(✉) 07:36, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Question Are the galaxy's spiral arms slightly cut off? The one on the left seems to loop back into the shot.
Nick-D (
talk) 08:00, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
@
Nick-D: I agree that a slightly wider crop would be better, but there are no other images in the Commons category at
commons:Category:NGC 1097 that have a similar level of size and clarity and are nearly true color. I think that the closest alternative to this image in regards to quality is the decidedly "false" colored
File:Coiled Galaxy.jpg. ↠Pine(✉) 08:10, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - Very fuzzy and noisy in full size, appears to be upsampled, also blown higlights in center. This mirror image (do we know which one is correct?) is much better: [
[1]] - --
Janke |
Talk 22:19, 3 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose - needs a wider field of view. The "noise" is actually part of the galaxy (
these areas have a low projected area density of stars) - the real noise characteristics of the image are seen on the bottom right. I don't think it is reasonable to observe this galaxy in whole without blowing out/saturating the center.
MER-C 20:39, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
I beg to disagree. IMO, it looks like upsampled thermal noise of the sensor. Compare with the original-sized mirror image linked above! --
Janke |
Talk 22:03, 5 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose because (although showing only a much narrower field of view)
File:NGC 1097 center Hubble.jpg shows how a much better image of the same subject is possible. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 00:14, 7 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment. There's a fair amount of noise in the flat surfaces (especially window panes) and the surrounding foliage is quite blurry. The article is short, but it also appears to indicate that this is not really a historic building any more, but rather merely a 19th-century mansion built in an earlier style on top of what used to be an old castle. Is there enough encyclopedic value here to make up for the faults in the image? (And if so, should we accept a caption that glosses over this history?) —
David Eppstein (
talk) 07:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Substandard detail. Doubtful EV given the relative obscurity of the "castle," reconstructed in the 19th century. (Gołuchów was politically part of Prussia-cum-Germany in 1793-1918). –
Sca (
talk) 14:38, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose per David and Sca.
Geoffroi 20:35, 4 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2019 at 01:40:58 (UTC)
Reason
I'm not sure why this didn't pass
the first time. Perhaps too much of the context was in a note at the bottom of the article. But this is an excellent example of a satirical cartoon that shows a negative view of someone who's now considered almost above reproach, challenging our modern view of his climb to fame. A prominent illustration in a featured article.
Support as before.
MER-C 18:43, 5 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Support. Because it's still funny 200 years later, definitely not true of all editorial cartoons. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 07:19, 6 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 21 Dec 2019 at 05:36:14 (UTC)
Reason
The best (and currently only) image of this now-extinct regiment, showing the regimental uniform clearly at the time of the Crimean War. Some nice examples of the famous
Crimean beard
@
MER-C,
Geoffroi,
Janke, and
Bammesk: Tweaked it. Sorry, Christmas is getting at me. Let me know what you think; I don't want to lose it looking like a carbon print, because that's misleading, but I can readily tweak within that, and there was a lot of unused brightness levels on the right. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.3% of all
FPs 07:03, 15 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Jabez Hughes after Cundall & Howlett - Heroes of the Crimean War - Sergeant John Geary, Thomas Onslow and Lance Corporal Patrick Carthay of the 95th (Derbyshire) Regiment of Foot.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 13:08, 21 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator—kallerna 12:04, 11 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment - As with the Faeroe sheep, there's a problem with the composition, since neither the penguins nor the location are the focal point. Less is more! --
Janke |
Talk 12:41, 13 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Comment – leaning to support but it is only used in a gallery in
Boulders Beach. (it has some EV in
Simon's Town as well)
Bammesk (
talk) 14:47, 14 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose per Janke.
Geoffroi 19:15, 17 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Dec 2019 at 05:41:36 (UTC)
Reason
This is a representation of a point cloud accumulated using an automotive lidar from a moving vehicle. This type of lidar may be used on autonomous cars, which is a popular topic recently. As a striking image that is the first and (so far) only example of this type of data on Wikimedia Commons, it provides encyclopaedic value for lidar, as well as articles on the algorithmic techniques of aligning such data (SLAM and point set registration).
Support as nominator –
dllu(t,
c) 05:41, 13 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Support - even though I'd much prefer a viewpoint from the car's position, but I realize that might be much more cluttered... I guess this was recorded at night - no people visible (unless that's a drunken person leaning against the light pole at 2 o'clock from center... ;-) --
Janke |
Talk 09:27, 13 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Visual information in this type of image is not readily accessible to the general reader/viewer, therefore it lacks EV. –
Sca (
talk) 15:45, 13 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Really? I beg to differ very strongly, I found this image very interesting indeed, and the info in it very accessible and of high EV. In context of the articles, it really explains how a Lidar "sees" the world around it. Did you look at it in full size? --
Janke |
Talk 21:47, 13 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Ouster OS1-64 lidar point cloud of intersection of Folsom and Dore St, San Francisco.png --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 09:25, 26 December 2019 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Don't see much EV in an old video of a presidential address. (Nothing against Obama.) –
Sca (
talk) 15:08, 17 December 2019 (UTC)reply
This is the latest State of the Union Address we can obtain without
a watermark until Trump is out of office and his library opens. At that time, Trump's address will also be old. This is also the only video I have seen that shows the closing of the session, when the Speaker dissolves the joint session and recognizes the House Majority Leader for a motion to close the session. I think that part is never transmitted on network television. This is the first time I have seen that and I have watched every State of the Union address in the past 19 years. This video also shows the introduction of the justices of the Supreme Court and the President's cabinet. ---
C&
C (
Coffeeandcrumbs) 20:33, 17 December 2019 (UTC)reply