Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Aug 2020 at 17:48:16 (UTC)
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons. Illustrates article well. Not appropriate as the lead image, but shows the way the animal retracts its neck and legs.
I'm trying to decide if the dirty shell is a problem. On the one hand, they do swim, so it would be possible to get a washed-off shell in the wild. On the other hand, the shell isn't the main focus. Charles, can you give your thoughts? Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 23:53, 21 August 2020 (UTC)reply
I'm far from an expert, but I understand that details of the shell are important for identification. I doubt we'd feature a picture of a beetle with dirty elytra. I don't think this is particularly suitable as an infobox image, and I'm not completely clear on the extent to which it adds significantly to the article -- which is not to say that I don't think it's a good picture! Lots of personality.
Josh Milburn (
talk) 07:44, 22 August 2020 (UTC)reply
This is not presented as an identification image, more behaviour i.e. the feet. October is a dry month in South Africa, so sand and dust everywhere - I could have gone and given him a brush down...
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 08:54, 22 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Maybe Charlie could airbrush the dirt off. –
Sca (
talk) 12:57, 22 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Support Cute little fellow, isn't he? Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 19:48, 21 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Support. Nice picture, not a bad little article, appreciate that you can see the stripes and get an idea of habitat. Any idea of subspecies?
Josh Milburn (
talk) 07:45, 22 August 2020 (UTC)reply
The experts do not agree about the number/validity of subspecies.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 08:45, 22 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Support – We're so used to seeing pix of gray squirrels and red squirrels that this sporty-looking striped squirrel is an interesting change. (Target article could be more detailed as to diet and habits, though.) –
Sca (
talk) 12:51, 22 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2020 at 05:42:50 (UTC)
Reason
A lovely image of a historic women's college. Part of a lovely progression in the article where you can see the trees grow in at the college over the decades. The college ceased to exist in 1911, so there's limited chances to document it.
I thought that it did, but I had some trouble telling as there's a small amount of what I presume is lens distortion as well. I'm uploading a -.3 degree rotation; if you want to have a poke,
here's the uncropped restored version. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 06:14, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment – It does look tilted; either that, or perspective is distorted. Detail might not be too bad for the 1860s, but huge featureless foreground detracts from EV regarding this obscure institution. –
Sca (
talk) 12:49, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
question Why is the infobox image not more valuable for the article?
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 19:18, 31 August 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Charlesjsharp: I'll be honest: I do like that one better, but it is a little smaller, largely because it's cut from a frankly bizarre and awful choice to make it an oval print, and I figured adding some extra sky was fine, but I didn't want to use excessive speculation on the actal grounds. Might touch it up a bit more and nominate it instead. Withdraw. I'll be back! Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 23:47, 31 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Sep 2020 at 04:55:08 (UTC)
Reason
An important documentary that was selected as one of the first 25 films inducted in the
National Film Registry, this is yet another film that is worth watching for its achievements.
Support as nominator –
17jiangz1 (
talk) 23:03, 24 August 2020 (UTC)reply
It is incredibly impressive, but I'm not quite sure I understand why it exists. What's the advantage of this over a photograph, given any change from the real object lessens its encyclopedic value in representing that object? It's an amazing work, but I don't understand why it exists. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 01:45, 25 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Static photos of electronic devices are inherently uninteresting and lack EV. –
Sca (
talk) 13:57, 25 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Per above. Uninteresting, drab, thus fails criterion #3. --
Janke |
Talk 12:18, 26 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Support I was going to complain about the resolution, then I saw the original size. About 500 dpi is ample. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 15:09, 28 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Sep 2020 at 15:06:25 (UTC)
Reason
A fine Reutlinger photograph. Some minor damage to the right edge of her dress, otherwise able to be restored to a pretty pristine state. Restored on the article creator's request.
Support – As the article creator, I'm thrilled that the image on the biographical article will be of such good quality. Those Reutlinger arrays in Commons include some real treasures, but they're often damaged and need restoration. This is a great example of what's possible. –
Penny Richards (
talk) 15:32, 31 August 2020 (UTC)reply
I think this is that transitional period between the long-exposure film of the mid to late 19th century that required people to use devices to hold themselves still, and the more spontaneous poses allowed by faster film. I've noticed a bit of a nosedive in quality around the 1910s when they realise they can shoot faster with a bit of loss of quality, and are using it to shoot the same sort of compositions people are used to from long exposures, before film quality catches back up and compositions grow more interesting. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 23:45, 31 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Sep 2020 at 00:25:55 (UTC)
Reason
Quite a fine image, freely licensed, and from a somewhat under-represented period for free licensing. Also, she's clearly important. The light line on her shirt appears to be a reflection from her bracelet.
Promoted File:Mrs. Constance B. Motley, first woman Senator, 21st Senatorial District, N.Y., raising hand in V sign.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 07:36, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment – Widely known photo. What's new about it? –
Sca (
talk) 12:52, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose Good EV, but the photo needs restoration before it meets the FP criteria. The composition is also not great, but that's true of most of the photos of this ceremony.
Nick-D (
talk) 23:21, 29 August 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Nick-D,
Sca, and
TheFreeWorld: I've done a full restoration. See what you think! Also, I Support Alt 1Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 07:28, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support restored version, oppose original (
t ·
c) buidhe 17:52, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support alt 1.
MER-C 18:39, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support alt 1. Strong EV and a competently executed photo. As noted above, there don't seem to be any good photos of this historic ceremony, possibly due to the location where it took place (the deck of an operational battleship cramped with large numbers of VIPs and sailors).
Nick-D (
talk) 00:05, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support alt 1. --
Gnosis (
talk) 03:42, 4 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Mamoru Shigemitsu signs the Instrument of Surrender, officially ending the Second World War.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 21:49, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
MER-C 16:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)reply
question Having read the article, I don't see where pink smoke is relevant!
Charlesjsharp (
talk)
@
Charlesjsharp: I believe that's the pigment powders floating through the air -
Holi is perhaps best known in the West, at least, for the coloured powders thrown about as part of the celebration, not that that's particularly well-explained in
Holi, and barely touched upon in
Lathmar Holi - I think it's presumed to be an "everyone knows this" sort of thing, when it shouldn't be. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 22:13, 30 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Problems with the article aside, I'm inclined to SupportAdam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 22:21, 30 August 2020 (UTC)reply
Support There's limited composition possibilities for a unique museum specimen like this. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 08:14, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment For me, a picture taken from in front of the exhibit would be better, not the side. The image on the 9GAG website shows a better POV, but the ideal would be from slightly higher up. Even better would be to ask permission from the museum to take a shot for Wikipedia with the glass removed.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 10:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Charlesjsharp I can't find it on 9GAG, link ? Yes, glass off and tripod allowed, my wish. --
Petar Milošević (
talk) 12:09, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I have similar shot, but i don't like composition. I choose that above - diagonal. Also its more about wheel than axle, which should take good % of photo. --
Petar Milošević (
talk) 19:08, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2020 at 01:21:58 (UTC)
Reason
This photo is a great visualization of the
Indian monsoon. It shows fishing boats, the lifeblood of the village
Anjarle, lashed together tightly to protect from the unforgiving monsoon, whose clouds are visible behind the boats. It is already a featured picture on Wikimedia Commons and appeared as picture of the day on the Wikimedia Commons and the Bengali Wikipedia.
Articles in which this image appears
the FA
India WP oldest country FA (to turn 16 this month) has had this picture in its
Geography section for over a year now.
Oppose. This looks oversaturated to me, and many of the white areas such as the roof of the frontmost boat are overexposed to featureless white. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 19:50, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose Please nominator, you need to link to most relevant articles. See FP guidelines.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 18:40, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment Image does not add value to articles and is incorrectly categorized for FP. This is not a natural phenomenon.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 11:58, 6 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support It has been in the FA
India in the Geography section—as an illustration of the monsoon—since September 2019.
Fowler&fowler«Talk» 06:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I'm very sorry but I've reinstated the picture in
India where the tradition is to add, remove, or replace pictures only during the annual or biannual, image discussions. Without that, a page with > 40K views a day would be in a mess. The next discussion is in (this upcoming) November. What exactly would be an illustration of an Indian monsoon anyway? An ordinary, anonymous, downpour, indistinguishable from those in Bangladesh, Burma, Thailand, Cambodia, Sri Lanka, ...? The pictures need to illustrate specific text. (Until last September we had two pictures showing the monsoon (part of a daily rotating template in Geography):
File:NDRF in Bihar Flood 2.jpg and an FP
File:Agasthiyamalai range and Tirunelveli rainshadow.jpg, both illustrating the text there.) I'm the primary author of India.
Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:40, 6 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I've already pinged Charlesjsharp, but would @
Adam Cuerden,
David Eppstein, and
Mydreamsparrow: like to be judges in November? It would really help us out. We can work out something whereby you won't be importuned unduly. I will soon write a proposal on
Talk:India and can ping you. Best,
Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:51, 6 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Fowler&fowler: Insofar as I can. I'm not Indian, and can't speak on things like, say, which Indian monuments or cities most deserve pictures, but I can try and advise as far as I can. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 17:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Adam Cuerden: I'm not either. Nationality or citizenship is not a requirement, might even be a plus for NPOV. I think we need advice on an image's quality more than its appropriateness for the text. ( Recently, for example, someone objected to a picture
File:Kurta traditional front sandalwood buttons.jpg (of our son, now an adult, but 15 at the time) as a part of an illustration of
Kurta, a collarless shirt. The objection was: "Extremely low quality image. Low relevance. Probably violates children Personality rights. Just not an image for a FA." It is those kinds of issues I'm not very good with. Thanks,
Fowler&fowler«Talk» 17:57, 6 September 2020 (UTC)reply
What is this 'tradition is to add, remove, or replace pictures only during the annual or biannual, image discussions.'
User:Fowler&fowler? This is news to me as a regular Wikipedia editor. Please explain asap. As far as I know, any editor can edit any article at any time.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 19:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC). And to revert my good faith edit may be considered edit-warring which is not recommended. As a matter of fact, these boats are NOT secured ready for a monsoon. Any seaman could tell you that.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 19:12, 6 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Parked boats at Anjarle Creek.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 05:00, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2020 at 03:57:51 (UTC)
Reason
A really fun - and particularly daring for 1887! - photo of a ridiculous scene in a ridiculous opera. The wings are drawn on in multiple versions of this image; I presume the real ones didn't photograph well with the long shots of the time. Really encyclopædic for the scene.
Atelier
Nadar, restored by
Adam Cuerden. The alternate was based on my work, but colourised by
Wilfredor.
Support either as nominator – Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 03:57, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support original, but Oppose Alt 1 well-executed colorized version
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 08:56, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support I know there is a lot of speculation with the colors, maybe it is a destructive version because we will never know exactly how it looked (since the colors of the garments can change even in events of the same work), but thank you very much for proposing it
Wilfredor (
talk) 12:35, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support original.
MER-C 18:13, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support original (
t ·
c) buidhe 18:04, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Atelier Nadar - Fly scene from Offenbach's Orphée aux enfers with Jeanne Granier as Eurydice and Eugène Vauthier as Jupiter, 1887 revival, wide-angle shot.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 05:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Sep 2020 at 06:16:09 (UTC)
Reason
Stunning and terrifying detail. Saw this on Commons. It impressed me and set of all my insect phobias. But I am tampering them down. It was focusstacked from
28 images, so that every part of it is crystal clear and terrifying, especially the sharp pointy claws and fat white body. ...But, that said, this is one of the best insect photos I've seen, and we want it here, and I won't let my phobia of maggots and grubs stop that.
Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 06:16, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support A good example of where the nominated image should not be in the infobox.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 08:54, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Aye. Infoboxes are a... useful tool, but not perfect at getting everything about something. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 03:42, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
For some reason I've developed a deep-seated aversion to orange ones in recent years. –
Sca (
talk) 14:16, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support Looks rather good. Could wish for more resolution, though; I can't think when I last wasn't able to count the individual feather barbs on your photos, but wildlife photography is all about taking chances when they come. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 08:16, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment Resolution wise a bit tight considering the loose crop and especially if one is to focus only on one of the birds. What does the second bird add? --
Muhammad(talk) 12:31, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
Tomer T (
talk) 08:58, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose I think the second image is best, don't know why the first one is there at all as the trees block the building. This one is a lovely image, but doesn't add as much value to the article.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 09:06, 1 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I think Charles is right about the tree-image, so I tossed it, per the slightly terrible
WP:SOFIXIT redirect. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 08:33, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
On the one hand, the actual photo is gorgeous if zoomed in. It'd be an absolutely stunning poster. On the other hand, it's not really the most thumbnail-friendly photo. Perhaps {{
CSS image crop}} to the rescue? But I think I'll Support on merits. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 08:26, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support. Beautiful image, used prominently and appropriately (if not as the lead image) on its article. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 19:51, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support Sharp, focused perfectly, and even a rather artistic composition. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 08:18, 2 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Sep 2020 at 08:04:52 (UTC)
Reason
There was a
previous nomination back in 2012, but I don't understand the arguments. William Waud was an artist hired to document the American Civil War. There's no photographs of Sherman's occupancy of the
Green-Meldrim House (or I'm horribly mistaken), but we have on-the-spot documentation of the most important event to happen there. I can't see how that isn't exceptionally valuable.
Support. I think the historic usage gives this enough EV. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 21:55, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Entrance Hall of Mr Chas. Green's house, Savannah Ga, now occupied as Head Quarters by Gen Sherman.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 10:53, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment. One of nine tiny thumbnail images on its article. Where is the EV? —
David Eppstein (
talk) 16:12, 3 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I'm going to have to second David. It's a great image, but it's barely this side of used. It's the equivalent of a gallery image, and can't be an FP until that changes. If the model enters production, gaining its own article, it'll naturally gain prominence and will then be featureable. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 03:31, 4 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Looks like a common garden variety promotional pic. Lacks visual interest. (I say this despite a certain fondness for green VWs.)
[2] –
Sca (
talk) 14:21, 4 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
MER-C 18:14, 5 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support either.
MER-C 17:10, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support original – the spider isn't centered but the asymmetrical leaves filling the left side works.
Bammesk (
talk) 19:11, 5 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support Edit 1 but would prefer a slightly cooler version. This one seems a bit too warm --
Muhammad(talk) 08:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
OpposeI did not vote for this at Commons FP because of oversaturation and off-centre crop. Neither was corrected.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 09:03, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support edit 1 Much better. Oppose originalCharlesjsharp (
talk) 20:23, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support This is an excellent example of NASA astronaut portraits, and a very good portrait of the subject. I really liked the previous FPC of Mr Melvin with his dogs (as a great portrait with lots of character, and potential to be used in a wide range of articles), and would also support it again if it was renominated.
Nick-D (
talk) 23:43, 5 September 2020 (UTC)reply
PS also at a technical level there is visible grain in the sky and visible chromatic aberration at the edges of the buildings near the left and right sides of the shot. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 17:22, 10 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose - per above, messy, uninspiring composition. --
Janke |
Talk 10:50, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support There's been a lot of commentary over recent years about the over-development around the sacred Islamic sites in Saudi Arabia. This photo clearly illustrates the results, and does a good job of presenting this site as it actually is, not as it used to be and is marketed. Looking at satellite imagery on Google maps shows that this site now sits in the middle of an grid of ugly buildings with yet more under construction. As such, the EV (which is a major consideration for an an encyclopedia) is strong, and much stronger than pictures which misrepresent the site.
Nick-D (
talk) 11:31, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support per Nick-D. EV goes above prettiness here (
t ·
c) buidhe 23:15, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – This image appears to have been taken from a hotel about 1000ft away. A better camera and lens from the same location can achieve much better images. ---
C&
C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:39, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2020 at 07:27:31 (UTC)
Reason
A difficult place to get good pictures of with a ban on cameras inside the mosque. I managed to get this from a nearby building. Kaaba literally means cube and the angle on this does a great job of showing that.
Support. The pixel count is quite low for FPC, but I'm willing to overlook that given its extreme encyclopedic value as the stable lead image of its topic, the striking visual quality of the shot, the difficulty of getting this shot, and the image degradation that likely comes just from all the air across the distance needed to get this shot. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 07:45, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose too small and too little definition. 09:00, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 11:44, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose Quality issues - small, blurry at lower left & right. Why would it be difficult to shoot a better photo? --
Janke |
Talk 10:54, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – A better camera and lens from the same location can achieve a much better result. This appears to be a cell phone image. ---
C&
C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 11:09, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Ouch. I'll wait for the better Camera and better lens. FWIW, this was taken on a Canon 7D with a 400mm L Lens --
Muhammad(talk) 13:04, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose The "artsy" star trails distract to such an extent that the EV suffers. Besides, it appears this is a composite, not a real image. Strong (editing?) artifacts at top of mountains. --
Janke |
Talk 15:12, 7 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Per Janke. Gimmicky. –
Sca (
talk) 14:35, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose because this photo is likely edited to have fast-moving stars appeared, and also the blue sky.
Evan0512 (
talk) 00:55, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose. Foreground lighting (bright enough, from a single non-moving point of illumination, to have crisp visible shadows) seems highly inconsistent with star exposure (roughly 1.5 hours judging by the length of the star trails). —
David Eppstein (
talk) 01:19, 14 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 18 Sep 2020 at 00:30:47 (UTC)
Reason
I think this predates anything else in
WP:FP/THEATRE by about 50 years, which makes it unique for us, and starts to bring in a whole new generation of theatre and artists. Plus, it's one of Gluck's major operas, which makes it quite valuable. It wasn't an easy restoration - the paper was somewhat filthy - but I did my best.
Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 00:30, 8 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support – that's a ton of restoration!, nice.
Bammesk (
talk) 03:33, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Bammesk: I've kind of been enjoying this year. Bunch of things rejected in previous years as too much work to ever do are getting done. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 14:43, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support impressive restoration work, has EV (
t ·
c) buidhe 23:12, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2020 at 15:36:08 (UTC)
Reason
Meets all 8 of the WP:FP? criteria, and represents the highest resolution 1:100,000 Survey of Palestine fully combined map available anywhere. The stitching of the 24 underlying maps has been done to a high technical standard, as has the georeferencing. The map is of great encyclopaedic value, representing the territory of
Mandatory Palestine immediately prior to its dissolution into
Israel and the
Palestinian territories and the dispersion of the
Palestinian refugees.
A suggestion: how about a JPEG version with a file size of about 70 or 80 MB? It's not easy to open at 424MB.
Bammesk (
talk) 02:55, 10 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Thanks, much easier to open (with some additional minor artifacts at magnification). I did some spot checks and couldn't find any serious alignment problems. The rectangular grids don't always line up, but that seems to be a feature of the maps, not necessarily an alignment problem. I am Ok with supporting either the JPEG or the PNG, one is easier to open and the other has higher quality. I wait to see if others find any problems.
Bammesk (
talk) 03:16, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now - the stitching is not quite right in places.
MER-C 16:32, 10 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Hi @
MER-C: would you mind pointing out exactly where? Just in case there is a misunderstanding here, e.g. with the intended grid-shift at the top.
Onceinawhile (
talk) 21:19, 10 September 2020 (UTC)reply
There's a bunch of discontinuities across y~18800, particularly near the left hand side. These are mostly contours that are duplicated or terminate. If the map is actually like that, then please say so and I will withdraw my oppose.
MER-C 16:23, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
MER-C:, @
Onceinawhile: - Please find a close-up view of the coordinates (040, 070) at pixels y~18800. The original scans for
14Rafa and
17Nitsana have mismatched contour lines. For example, the diagonal line from SW to NE at (040,078) is only part of 17 (lower image), not part of 14 (upper image):
{{{annotations}}}
Survey of Palestine 1942-1958 1-100,000 14Rafa, close-up at 040,075
{{{annotations}}}
Survey of Palestine 1942-1958 1-100,000 17Nitsana, close-up at 040,075
I have produced a new version of the file with tighter cropping. Due to the size > 100 MB, I am unable to update the original version. Should it be uploaded under a new file name and the nomination process continue with this new file? -
DutchTreat (
talk) 20:30, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Sep 2020 at 22:39:39 (UTC)
Reason
A fairly charming image of the first African American nurse in the U.S.
Army Nurse Corps. Rather like her wooden name plaque and it's clever positioning in the photo as almost a caption.
Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 22:39, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support Nice image. (
t ·
c) buidhe 23:10, 9 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support – how about brightening the left side a bit? It looks to me like a scanning problem rather than a photographic or lighting feature.
Bammesk (
talk) 03:13, 10 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Bammesk: I thought it was lighting, but it is a bit extreme, so I've lightened it a bit. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 23:56, 10 September 2020 (UTC)reply
This was shot with a flash and that's the primary light source (see her neck, also the wall and window trims have a similar shadow). Flash doesn't leave a rectangular gradient on one side (left side), so the dark left side is not a feature of the photo. It can be corrected fully IMO. . . . Here are some possibilities of what could have happened: 1-the photo wasn't scanned properly (it can happen with flatbed scanners, similar to photocopy machines), or 2-something was partially impeding the path of the flash light on the left side (and vertically), this is unlikely given the well-defined shadows on the wall trims, also unlikely given nothing is impeding the path of the lens, or 3-the negative wasn't handled/developed properly. In any case, the dark left side is not a feature of the photo, so I think it is Ok to fix it.
Bammesk (
talk) 01:59, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Bammesk: There's a definite shadow on the left side of her face. That makes me presume the lighting isn't centred. I could be wrong, but I believe a flash at the time would be the old flash pans, not one on the camera. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 02:14, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I agree, it is not an on-camera flash, and it is positioned slightly off center. Nonetheless the primary source is one flash, placed near the camera and above the lens.
Bammesk (
talk) 02:49, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
With slight reluctance, Done. Given the clear reflection off of the one box in the upper mid-left, the upper left-centre clearly should be lighter than the bit left of that, though. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 03:35, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Definitely an improvement. At first I thought her name was some kind of watermark :-)
Bammesk (
talk) 03:56, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
It's a cheeky addition of a wooden nameplate, and I kind of.... really like it. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 05:33, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support Good EV, and an interesting portrait. I'm also a fan of the nameplate, and want one just like it for my desk at work.
Nick-D (
talk) 11:09, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I'd suggest getting your own name. One just like it would be odd, unless you were a nurse of the same name and rank. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 19:45, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Dunno, it probably wouldn't be the weirdest thing my colleagues have seen me do.
Nick-D (
talk) 04:39, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Capt. Della H. Raney, Army Nurse Corps, who now heads the nursing staff at the station hospital at Camp Beale, CA - NARA - 535942.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 22:47, 19 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support prefer the composition of your other picture in the article but the quality of this one is much superior --
Muhammad(talk) 06:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support with a quibbleEvery photograph in the article has the head facing the camera. It would be nice to have a profile on the article. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 18:38, 11 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
MER-C 17:06, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support, thanks for the nom. --
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 17:19, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support, interesting and detailed. Question: The left edge of the vessel (about 1/4th from right) looks a bit chopped off compared with the other blurry boat edge(s) - is this an artifact of stitching? --
Janke |
Talk 18:44, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
The horizontal rays of light represent the distance the boat traveled during the exposure. It probably traveled slower / stayed for longer on the left than the right. --
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support –
KoH, there are a couple of odd (sharp) transition lines in the water at around x=7400, I annotated it on Commons. They don't look real to me, are they?
Bammesk (
talk) 18:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose for now Great photo but have to oppose till image is corrected by
KoH.Charlesjsharp (
talk) 19:14, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Charles, please be "specific" about what you want corrected, in your own words, so there is no ambiguity. Particularly since you are opposing.
Bammesk (
talk) 19:28, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Same stitching issue as you pointed out. Very easy for KoH to rectify as he's an active participant on Commons.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 20:54, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Bammesk and
Charlesjsharp: I have verified on my source images that this is real and not a stitching error. Maybe it's caused by bright lights creating rays of light and dark? --
King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 03:32, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support Thanks, it's a great photo.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 09:06, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support – she looks much younger than her age.
Bammesk (
talk) 19:08, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose unfortunately a poorly composed photo though, both considering the backgound and her expression.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 19:11, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I disagree, her expression and the background are of a judge in India, both are realistic for the subject.
Bammesk (
talk) 19:33, 12 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support I'm not the biggest fan of the crop, but it's at least a standard one. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 21:48, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support. Encyclopedic value is there, and the somewhat supercilious expression is appropriate for her position. —
David Eppstein (
talk) 23:54, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support as David, the expression is befitting. I'd prefer the background to be clearer if someone can clone out the 'thingy' --
Muhammad(talk) 06:41, 14 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support although I too want the lamp to disappear.
MER-C 18:48, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support as nominator –
Evan0512 (
talk) 02:23, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose. At thumbnail sizes the black-on-black makes only the metro sign legible. Even at larger sizes, where the detail in the black can be seen well enough, there is nothing interesting in that detail. And this is not used in any articles, so encyclopedic value is not evident (and it would need to be in stable use for some time before any nomination, so adding it now is not going to help). —
David Eppstein (
talk) 23:49, 13 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Speedy close, with an explanation The image is decent enough, although those poles in the foreground are unfortunate, but I suspect there's better times to get this - sunset, say, or twilight, that'll give just enough light to bring everything up a bit. An Iphone is a pretty decent camera for a phone, but it comes out a bit grainy at low light levels as most digital cameras do. The real blocker is that it's not actually in any of the articles listed, and I'm not sure why you listed it as being in them - are they meant as suggestions? Unfortunately, it has to be used on English Wikipedia in order to be accepted and while there's exceptions for being stable in an article before nomination (like being the only photo in an article, or being so clearly important that no-one sensible would remove it), I don't think this hits any of them. If it's not in any articles, it's not a featured picture. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 03:14, 14 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2020 at 21:31:54 (UTC)
Reason
Last nomination barely failed to reach quorum. The 1910s were a bit of a photographic nadir - I think the ability to get faster photographs won out over quality for a while, and prints weren't amazing, but this is decent for the time, even having a bit of character to it. Think it's a rather good image from a very underrepresented country, and depicts someone who is both an important Hungarian poet and writer, and an important person in LGBT history.
Oppose because the hamster is mirrored on the floor.
Evan0512 (
talk) 21:50, 14 September 2020 (UTC)reply
But it is not negatively affecting the EV I feel. Please explain your concern, if I could rectify it, it would be better right ? DreamSparrowChat 04:08, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose Cannot be FP as not in article.Charlesjsharp (
talk) 08:18, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Charlesjsharp, I removed the first article name from the Nom page. The picture is related to breeding and the image is still there in the article. Have a look. DreamSparrowChat 09:59, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose Does not add EV to breeding article, nor variations article as it is not described as a variation.
Charlesjsharp (
talk) 08:41, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support I don't see how a more artistic rendition hurts this in any way. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 22:43, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose - I don't like the two colour background and I find the reflection worrying.
Cwmhiraeth (
talk) 10:21, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support - high quality and encyclopedic depiction, I don't see anything wrong with a creative layout (indeed the mirror allows more of the animal to be seen
TSP (
talk) 15:42, 19 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support, but have a look at the left dimple/ nose-mouth crease. It looks a little odd. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 22:46, 15 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I am only seeing natural deep crease. ---
C&
C (Coffeeandcrumbs) 01:54, 17 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Edges look a bit odd, due to grain, I think. It's nothing major. Think I'm just more used to older filmstock. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 11:17, 18 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support, but I'd suggest also uploading a JPEG version, as they thumbnail better, and switching the nomination to it. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.4% of all
FPs 06:20, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
I could see maybe tweaking the levels of this as well. Don't stretch it the whole way, but I'd raise the white point a bit if I were you. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 23:28, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support.
MER-C 18:46, 16 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2020 at 06:17:12 (UTC)
Reason
A high-quality lithograph of probably the most popular scene of Robert le diable: The one in which the spirits of perverted nuns all seduce the "hero". ...Yeah, this opera's morality is really off. Don't worry, the "hero" decides not to sell his soul to his father, who is a devil, because he hears a song that reminds him of his mother, but only after his love interest arrives to tell him he's going to get everything he wants either way! (He was still going to sign the contract, just to make sure, though, before he heard the music)
Support. another great work by Mr. Cuerden. --
Gnosis (
talk) 00:51, 20 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose - there is a large blurry smear on the top of the rightmost large foreground arch. It's bad enough that it is visible on the file description page.
MER-C 10:49, 20 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
MER-C,
Gnosis,
Evan0512,
Mydreamsparrow, and
Buidhe: Should be fixed now. Sorry. It was a slip of the healing brush. Luckily, I had the levels adjustments saved, so could just apply them to the original and copy over the patch. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 23:25, 20 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support.
MER-C 09:22, 21 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Promoted File:Pierre-Luc-Charles Cicéri - Eugène Cicéri - Philippe Benoist - Adolphe Jean Baptiste Bayot - Décorations de théâtre, Robert le diable, 3e act.jpg --
ArmbrustTheHomunculus 06:29, 26 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support There's some minor damage (whiter areas that don't appear to reflect any real objects) to the blurry part of the left background, but it's quite minor and I doubt anyone but me would even notice. It's a stunning photo. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 11:26, 18 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Hm. Actually, right edge is rather dark. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 03:04, 22 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Support.
MER-C 10:44, 20 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – Dancer not identified. –
Sca (
talk) 13:41, 28 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Dear
Sca, the dancer is unknown and unimportant here. This photo was taken from a dance competition. --
Shagil Kannur (
talk) 14:03, 28 September 2020 (UTC)reply
It's an established policy not to promote photos of anonymous individuals on the Main Page. –
Sca (
talk) 16:31, 28 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Then, nothing to say. This is a fine example of Indian classical dance. Thus, it should be promoted. The performer, a school student, was one among the many participants in a dance competition, not a well known dancer at all. The highlight here is the Indian classical Dance. I hope you consider the above facts.--
Shagil Kannur (
talk) 17:53, 28 September 2020 (UTC)reply
And let me see where the above mentioned policy has been stated.--
Shagil Kannur (
talk) 18:10, 28 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Identity is not required for FP. And FWIW, FP and POTD are not the same thing --
Muhammad(talk) 07:26, 29 September 2020 (UTC)reply
There is no such policy. The guidance is the instructions on top of this page and the
FP criteria, and neither mention the main page.
Bammesk (
talk) 03:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Unknown but Support.
Evan0512 (
talk) 20:07, 28 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose For a dance, a still photo (particularly a still photo only showing a small part of the body) is not terribly educational.
Calliopejen1 (
talk) 23:17, 28 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose – the article is about the dance so a full body photo would have more EV (encyclopedic value),
FP criterion #5. This photo would meet the EV criterion if the article described (say in a paragraph) this upper body pose, but I don't see that in the article. Also as a technical critique, the crop is too tight on top and left side.
Bammesk (
talk) 03:48, 29 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2020 at 09:51:20 (UTC)
Reason
An unusual image I found looking through the table of the events leading up to the United States Civil War. According to our article on the relevant ship in question, the image is not 100% accurate as it contains omissions and the ship in question is known to have hauled for more slaves then depicted here, however the same article states with citations that "...this image has become the one most used to depict conditions on a slave ship" and asserts that the image "...has become an iconic image of the inhumanity of the slave trade." Submitting here for community consideration of an FP star.
Plymouth Chapter of the Society for Effecting the Abolition of the Slave Trade
Support as nominator –
TomStar81 (
Talk) 09:51, 20 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Oppose - needs restoration. There's also some text on the bottom left that is cut off.
MER-C 10:54, 20 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
MER-C: The text is physically cut off in the original, as you can see in the
uncropped version. I'm not sure we would want to do a restoration on this as most of the damage is from tears, folds, and stains, rather than dust and scratches that you get on a photograph. Making such substantial alterations might affect the image's role as a verifiable historical document. But I would defer to
Adam's opinion on this.
Kaldari (
talk) 21:52, 22 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Looks like the text is cut off on
LOC original too. From seeing several illustrations on Wikisource, the text plausibly contains authorship information so it's important to the historical veracity of the document.
MER-C 16:38, 23 September 2020 (UTC)reply
...What's the source of this? It doesn't appear to be the LoC. Adam Cuerden(
talk)Has about 7.5% of all
FPs 06:34, 21 September 2020 (UTC)reply
@
Adam Cuerden: Since the LoC seems to have the physical document (they have 2 different photographs of it and it's housed in their Rare Book Reading Room) and I wasn't able to find another high res version on the internet that pre-dates ours, I imagine the uploader acquired it directly from the LOC Prints and Photographs Division (which you can do for a fee). I've done this myself for images where the version on the LoC website was sub-standard, e.g.
File:The Horse in Motion high res.tiff. This would also jive with the uploader's comment: "Higher resolution from LoC source". Unfortunately, the uploader retired many years ago, so we can't find out from them directly.
Kaldari (
talk) 21:58, 22 September 2020 (UTC)reply
Comment - I'd like to know a lot more about this particular print and its significance. The Brooks illustration was widely-distributed in a wide assortment of versions; the first, by Elford in 1788, seems to have simply been a single plan view with accompanying text (
possibly this); this was then added to in
a 1789 broadsheet. Many subsequent versions were made, of which this undated version seems to be one. Given it's not in great condition, I'd want some reason to believe it is both a historically-significant printing, and that no copy of this printing in better condition can be found.
TSP (
talk) 15:02, 23 September 2020 (UTC)reply