Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives June 14 2024

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Catharinenkirche_Westensee.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Catharinenkirche Westensee von Westen. By Agnete --Nightflyer 11:44, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Seems leaning in on the left. Otherwise very good. --Plozessor 16:11, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Gruss --Nightflyer 13:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 04:39, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Very good, but there is a dust spot. Can you remove it ? I added a note. --Sebring12Hrs 22:05, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
     Support --Sebring12Hrs 08:19, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support. Dust spot removed. Beautiful image, good quality. -- Spurzem 08:06, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 07:22, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Κυριακούλειο_Μέγαρο_1781.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Kyriakopouleio Megaro, Megara. --C messier 20:27, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment There's a random blue discolouration below the tree on the right --Vincent60030 14:21, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 09:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose Per Vincent60030, there's a huge blue spot. Should be possible to fix it though. --Plozessor 07:01, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Weak support It would be good quality if the blue spot were removed. Bahnfrend 08:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Removed the dot, should be good now. ReneeWrites 22:13, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Yes, ok for me now ..Plozessor 04:46, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 08:06, 11 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Clock_tower_at_the_Münchner_Residenz.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Clock tower at the Münchner Residenz --AuHaidhausen 18:30, 30 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Unerexposed IMO. Fixable? Красный 15:03, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Now? thank you--~~~~
  •  Support Good quality. --Красный 09:09, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment Quality is good, but I can't figure out if this blue color is an artistic look or a failure. Please discuss --Екатерина Борисова 02:34, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Extreme blue cast. --Plozessor 06:09, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support 👍--Plozessor 04:38, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support I appreciate the time you took to address other people's comments, the end result looks beautiful. ReneeWrites 13:11, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Thank you,you are really nice --AuHaidhausen 16:17, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 09:47, 10 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Infruitescence of a plant from Radès forest.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Common Dandelion Radès forest. By User:Smailtn --TOUMOU 08:14, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Grainy --Poco a poco 09:04, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support The criticism is not entirely unjustified. Nevertheless: It is an atmospheric and sharp image. I like it and I am in favor of QI. -- Spurzem 10:09, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per Poco a poco. In addition, this image was clearly miscategorized (no flowers visible, just fruits) and also misidentified (angular stem, achenes very different from Taraxacum officinale). --Robert Flogaus-Faust 11:30, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Way too grainy/noisy. Could be fixed with better RAW conversion though. --Plozessor 06:13, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 07:32, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Velo_24,_Berlin_(VB243553).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Steppenwolf pedelec citybike at VELOBerlin 2024 at Tempelhofer Feld, Berlin --MB-one 18:51, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. --Augustgeyler 18:37, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I'm sorry, but the background is too cluttered. The cut off person is quite distracting. --Zinnmann 20:10, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Zinnmann. --Sebring12Hrs 07:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The bicycle does not stand out from the bicycles in the background. The person is distracting too. --Plozessor 06:15, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree with the other opponents. Bahnfrend 08:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 09:50, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Poestlingsbergkirche,_Linz_(P1130983).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Wallfahrtskirche zu den Sieben Schmerzen Mariä auf dem Pöstlingberg, Linz --MB-one 21:51, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment This looks somehow tilted. The main church is fine but the other buildings (especially on the left) are looking distorted. --Plozessor 04:04, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done Thanks for the review --MB-one 17:43, 3 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 05:24, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose There are burned out details at the buildings and  Level of detail too low --Augustgeyler 18:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Augustgeyler. --Sebring12Hrs 11:26, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree with Augustgeyler. Also, I think there's too much (featureless) sky. Bahnfrend 08:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 09:49, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Une_abeille_entrain_de_butiner.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination a bee foragingI, the copyright holder of this work, hereby publish it under the following license:This image was uploaded as part of Wiki Loves Earth 2024. --Skander zarrad 19:37, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. Please include categories for location before nomination --MB-one 08:36, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment okay, i will do when i return home --Skander zarrad 11:48, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Depth of field issues. --Sebring12Hrs 15:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support The entire bee is in focus. I'm not terribly concerned that not every part of every flower is. ReneeWrites 19:16, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Per ReneeWrites. --Plozessor 06:16, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support I agree with the other supporters. Also, the centre of the flower is in focus. Bahnfrend 08:14, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support. The flower may be a bit too bright, but the bee ist very good. -- Spurzem 11:40, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 5 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 09:47, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Clark_Lake_Park_in_Kent,_Washington_-_29.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Clark Lake Park in Kent, Washington --Roc0ast3r 04:49, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Comment It seems perspective needs to be improved. --Sebring12Hrs 07:57, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --MB-one 18:18, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Perspective is still not within the rules and level of detail is very low here. --Augustgeyler 18:29, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Augustgeyler. --Plozessor 06:18, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Augustgeyler 13:29, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Yellow-legged gull (Larus michahellis) immature Sfax.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Slender-billed gull (Chroicocephalus genei) immature --Charlesjsharp 11:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Syrio 12:09, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  • I'm not opposed just wrong identification of the species, it is not a Slender-billed_gull but a Yellow-legged gull --El Golli Mohamed 20:27, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support El Golli Mohamed You could simply fix the category ;) --Plozessor 03:57, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done It was my error and El Golli Mohamed is right to wait for me to correct it. Charlesjsharp 15:04, 9 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Now  Support. --Smial 08:46, 10 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Like the nominator, I don't always get my file names right first time. Bahnfrend (talk) 08:30, 12 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 11:21, 9 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Εκπαιδευτήρια_Μπαχλιτζανάκη_2483.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Former Bahlitzanakis school, Piraeus. --C messier 20:11, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Sorry, but there was to much perspective corretion involved. The building looks annatural. --Augustgeyler 21:20, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support QI really is a damned-if-you-do, damned-if-you-don't kind of ordeal, huh? The picture's fine, let's discuss this. ReneeWrites 15:05, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Comment yes please dicuss. It is not only about PC. It think it was taken from a position too low and too close, forcing the camera to be tilted up too much. --Augustgeyler 21:25, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Sebring12Hrs 07:52, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good for me -- Spurzem 08:42, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose The lines are vertical now. But I am sorry, the perspective corrections are borderline. Due the a short distance and very low point of view the verticals had to be corrected very much resulting an a bit too unnatural reproduction of that building. --August Geyler (talk) 18:11, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good for me --PaestumPaestum 16:58, 13 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promoted   --Augustgeyler 07:34, 13 June 2024 (UTC)

File:Летний_сад._Аллегория_дня2.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination: Allegory of Day (bust in Summer Garden), Saint Petersburg, Russia. --Екатерина Борисова 02:57, 28 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Support Good quality. --Ploozessor 04:39, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Needs some perspective correction and there are some really prominent blue fringes to the right. --C messier 20:14, 5 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support -- Spurzem 14:14, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose CA in the upper right corner --Nikride 19:37, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Augustgeyler 21:29, 6 June 2024 (UTC)

File:La_cathédrale_de_la_Major_vue_depuis_le_parvis_du_Mucem.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination: La Major Cathedral of Marseille seen from the Mucem forecourt. --Remontees 17:27, 25 May 2024 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Comment Good picture but needs slight perspective correction --Plozessor 04:10, 26 May 2024 (UTC)
    • ✓ Done Is it better? --Remontees 22:32, 31 May 2024 (UTC)
      •  Comment Others might still find it not 'vertical' enough, but IMO it's good now. --Plozessor 06:49, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
        •  Comment I agree with you, I corrected the verticals. Thanks for your help. --Remontees 22:56, 1 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --Plozessor 12:39, 2 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It's leaning too much to me, please discuss. --Sebring12Hrs 07:40, 4 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Support Perspective is ok for me. --Zinnmann 11:44, 6 June 2024 (UTC)
  •  Weak oppose There is just a little to much distortion here, especially on the right side of the cathedral. --Augustgeyler 18:41, 7 June 2024 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 22:14, 13 June 2024 (UTC)