Commons:Featured picture candidates

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

Skip to: Add a nomination Guidelines for evaluating photographs Current candidates Delisting a featured picture Current delisting candidates Rules Contents

Formal things Nominating Guidelines for nominators Please read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates: Scope – In addition to falling within the Commons scope, candidates must be static two-dimensional images. All other types of files should be nominated at Commons:Featured media candidates. Licensing – Images licensed with solely "GFDL" or "GFDL and an NC-only license" are not acceptable due the restrictions placed on re-use by these licenses. Resolution – Raster images of lower resolution than 2 million pixels (pixels, not bytes) are typically rejected unless there are strong mitigating reasons. This does not apply to vector graphics (SVGs). Graphics on Commons are not only viewed on conventional computer screens. They may be used in high-resolution print versions, and the images may be cropped to focus on portions of the image. See Commons:Why we need high resolution media for more information. Scans – While not official policy, Help:Scanning provides advice on the preparation of various types of images that may be useful. General quality – pictures being nominated should be of high technical quality. Digital manipulations must not deceive the viewer. Digital manipulation for the purpose of correcting flaws in an image is generally acceptable, provided it is limited, well-done, and not intended to deceive. For photographs, typical acceptable manipulations include cropping, perspective correction, sharpening/blurring, and color/exposure correction. More extensive manipulations, such as removal of distracting background elements, should be clearly described in the image text, by means of the {{Retouched picture}} template. Undescribed or mis-described manipulations which cause the main subject to be misrepresented are never acceptable. For images made from more than one photo, you can use the {{Panorama}} or {{Focus stacked image}} templates. For historic images, acceptable manipulations might include digitally fixing rips, removal of stains, cleanup of dirt, and, for mass-produced artworks such as engravings, removal of flaws inherent to the particular reproduction, such as over-inking. Careful color adjustments may be used to bring out the original work from the signs of ageing, though care should be taken to restore a natural appearance. The original artistic intent should be considered when deciding whether it is appropriate to make a change. Edits to historic material should be documented in detail within the file description, and an unedited version should be uploaded and cross linked for comparison. Value – our main goal is to feature most valuable pictures from all others. Pictures should be in some way special, so please be aware that: almost all sunsets are aesthetically pleasing, and most such pictures are not in essence different from others, night-shots are pretty but normally more details can be shown on pictures taken at daytime, beautiful does not always mean valuable. Artworks, illustrations, and historical documents There are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject. Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable. Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself. Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well. Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable: Notable in its own right: Works by major artists, or works that are otherwise notable, such as the subjects of a controversy. Of high artistic merit: Works which, while not particularly well known, are nonetheless wonderful examples of their particular type or school of art. Of high historic merit: The historical method values very early illustrations of scenes and events over later ones. Hence, a work of poor quality depicting a contemporaneous historical event can be nonetheless important, even if the artistic merit is relatively low. Likewise, scans or photographs of important documents – which may not be at all artistic – nonetheless may be highly valuable if the documents are historically significant. The reason for the image's historical importance should be briefly stated in the nomination, for those reviewers unfamiliar with the subject. Of high illustrative merit: Works that illustrate or help explain notable subjects, for instance, illustrations of books, scientific subjects, or technical processes. The amount of artistic merit required for these will vary by subject, but, for instance, an illustration that makes the working of a complicated piece of machinery very clear need not be notable as a piece of artwork as well, whereas an illustration for a book might well be expected to reach much higher artistic standards. Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced." Photographs On the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field. Focus – every important object in the picture should normally be sharp. Exposure refers to the shutter diaphragm combination that renders an image with a tonal curve that ideally is able to represent in acceptable detail shadows and highlights within the image. This is called latitude. Images can be on the low side of the tonal curve (low range), the middle (middle range) or high side (upper range). Lack of shadow detail is not necessarily a negative characteristic. In fact, it can be part of the desired effect. Burned highlights in large areas are a distracting element. Composition refers to the arrangement of the elements within the image. The "Rule of thirds" is one useful guideline. Horizons should almost never be placed in the middle, where they "cut" the image in half. Often, a horizon creating a top or bottom third of the space works better. The main idea is to use space to create a dynamic image. Foreground and background – foreground and background objects may be distracting. You should check that something in front of the subject doesn't hide important elements and that something in background doesn't spoil the composition (for example that the streetlight doesn't "stand" on someone's head). Movement control refers to the manner in which motion is represented in the image. Motion can be frozen or blurred. Neither one is better than the other. It is the intention of representation. Movement is relative within the objects of the image. For example, photographing a race car that appears frozen in relation to the background does not give us a sense of speed or motion, so technique dictates to represent the car in a frozen manner but with a blurred background, thus creating the sense of motion, this is called "panning". On the other hand, representing a basketball player in a high jump frozen in relation to everything else, due to the "unnatural" nature of the pose would be a good photograph. Depth of field (DOF) refers to the area in focus in front of and beyond main subject. Depth of field is chosen according to the specific needs of every picture. Large or small DOF can either way add or subtract to the quality of the image. Low depth of field can be used to bring attention to the main subject, separating it from the general environment. High depth of field can be used to emphasize space. Short focal length lenses (wide angles) yield large DOF, and vice versa, long focal lenses (telephotos) have shallow DOF. Small apertures yield large DOF and conversely, large apertures yield shallow DOF. On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc. Shape refers to the contour of the main subjects. Volume refers to the three dimensional quality of the object. This is accomplished using side light. Contrary to general belief, front lighting is not the best light. It tends to flatten subject. Best light of day is early morning or late afternoon. Color is important. Oversaturated colors are not good. Texture refers to the quality of the surface of the subject. It is enhanced by side lighting… it is the "feel" to the touch. Perspective refers to the "angle" accompanied by lines that disappear into a vanishing point that may or may not be inside the image. Balance refers to the arrangement of subjects within the image that can either give equal weight or appear to be heavier on one side. Proportion refers to the relation of size of objects in picture. Generally, we tend to represent small objects small in relation to others, but a good technique is to represent small objects large contrary to natural size relationship. For example, a small flower is given preponderance over a large mountain…. This is called inversion of scales. Not all elements must be present. Some photographs can be judged on individual characteristics, that is, an image can be about color or texture, or color AND texture, etc. Noise refers to unwanted corruption of color brightness and quality and can be caused by underexposure. It is not a desirable quality and can be grounds for opposition. Symbolic meaning or relevance … Opinion wars can begin here … A bad picture of a very difficult subject is better than a good picture of an ordinary subject. A good picture of a difficult subject is an extraordinary photograph. Images can be culturally biased by the photographer and/or the observer. The meaning of the image should be judged according to the cultural context of the image, not by the cultural context of the observer. An image "speaks" to people, and it has the capacity to evoke emotion such as tenderness, rage, rejection, happiness, sadness, etc. Good photographs are not limited to evoking pleasant sensations … You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audio Please nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominations If a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types: Faithful digital reproductions of works notable in their own right, which the original author clearly intended to be viewed as a set. Examples: pages in a pamphlet, crops (puzzle pieces) of a prohibitively large scan, a pair of pendant paintings. Not acceptable: Arbitrary selection of sample works by an artist. A sequence of images showing the passage of time. They could depict frames of a moving/changing object or a static object during different times of day or different seasons. Examples: diagrams illustrating a process, steps of a dance, metamorphosis of an insect, maps/drawings/photos of the same subject over the years (frame of view should be more or less the same). A group of images depicting the same subject from different viewpoints, preferably taken under the same lighting conditions when possible. Examples: Exterior and interior of a building, different facades of a building, different interior views, obverse and inverse of a banknote/coin. Not acceptable: A selection of different rooms in a skyscraper, the facade of a church plus an organ, any images of fundamentally different scopes. A group of images which show all possible variations of a particular class of object. Examples: Male and female versions of an animal (preferably in the same setting), all known species of a genus. Not acceptable: A few breeds of cats (unless they share a defining characteristic and represent all possible examples of that). Simple tutorial for new users Tutorial: Nominate on COM:FPC How to nominate in 8 simple steps STEP 1 STEP 1 STEP 2 STEP 2 STEP 3 STEP 3 STEP 4 STEP 4 STEP 5 STEP 5 STEP 6 STEP 6 STEP 7 STEP 7 STEP 8 STEP 8 (last step) NOTE: You don't need to worry if you are not sure, other users will try their best to help you. Adding a new nomination If you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate image description and licensing, then do the following. Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button. All single files: For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2 All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination". Step 2: follow the instructions on the page that you are taken to, and save that page. Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list: {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg}} Strongly recommended: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Individual sports Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using {{subst:FPC-notice|Your image filename.jpg}} -- ~~~~. Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters. Voting Editors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates: {{Support}} ( Support), {{Oppose}} ( Oppose), {{Neutral}} ( Neutral), {{Comment}} ( Comment), {{Info}} (  Info ), {{Question}} ( Question), {{Request}} ( Request). You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator. A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above. Unhelpful reasons for opposing include: No reason "I don't like it" and other empty assessments "You can do better" and other criticisms of the author/nominator rather than the image Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidates Over time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote: Text to use Displays as Meaning {{Keep}}  Keep It deserves to remain a featured picture {{Delist}}  Delist It does not deserve to be a featured picture anymore. This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote: Text to use Displays as Meaning {{Keep}}  Keep Do not replace the old image with the new image as a FP. {{Delistandreplace}}  Delist and replace Replace the current FP with the proposed replacement. If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box: In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include: Information on the origin of the image (creator, uploader); A link to the original FP nomination (it will appear under "Links" on the image description page); Your reasons for nominating the image and your username. After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose. Featured picture candidate policy General rules The voting period is 9 complete days counted from the nomination. After the end of this period the result will be determined. Votes added on day 10 and after are not counted. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome Only registered contributors whose Commons accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Exception: registered users can always vote in their own nominations no matter the account age and number of edits. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated. Nominators and authors can withdraw their nominated pictures at any time. This is done by adding the following template: {{Withdraw}} ~~~~. Also, remember that if more than one version is nominated, you should explicitly state which version you are withdrawing. Remember, the goal of the Wikimedia Commons project is to provide a central repository for free images to be used by all Wikimedia projects, including possible future projects. This is not simply a repository for Wikipedia images, so images should not be judged here on their suitability for that project. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5) Pictures are speedy declined if they have no support (apart from the nominator). Pictures are speedy promoted if they have 10 support votes or more and no oppose votes. (Note that if it takes more than five days to reach this threshold, the picture can be promoted as soon as it is reached.) Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added. Pictures tagged {{FPX}} may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied, provided there are no support votes other than that of the nominator. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied. Only two active nominations by the same user (that is, nominations under review and not yet closed) are allowed. The main purpose of this measure is to contribute to a better average quality of nominations, by driving nominators/creators to choose carefully the pictures presented to the forum. Featuring and delisting rules A candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions: Appropriate license (of course) At least seven  Support votes (or 7  Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes Two different versions of the same picture cannot both be featured, but only the one with higher level of support, as determined by the closer. Whenever the closer is not sure which version has consensus to be featured, they should attempt to contact the voters to clarify their opinions if not clear from the nomination page. The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. There is also a limit of two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations. The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules. Above all, be polite Please don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care. Happy judging… and remember... all rules can be broken. See also To edit the list of nominations go to: Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list For a chronological list, see Commons:Featured_pictures/chronological For an archive of previous nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished Basic list of photography-related terms Quality image candidates Valued image candidates Photo challenge Photography critiques Help:Scanning

Table of contents

List may contain works considered Not Safe for Work (nudity). Nominators are requested, out of courtesy, to include the {{Nsfw}} template with such images. Users may select the gadget in user preferences "Deferred display of images tagged with {{Nsfw}} on COM:FPC" to enable the template's effect of hiding the image until selected.

Refresh page for new nominations: purge this page's cache

Featured picture candidates

File:Jewelry designing (edited).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 23:05:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Jewelry designing (edited).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Jewelry designing (edited).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
•  Info
  Photo of a jewelry designer in India. In the original, the curtain in the right part is wider than in this derivative. I also removed some color fringing as well as the banding/posterization on the curtain. Additionally I improved the contrast and hue. Probably a big counter argument could be the curtain on the right side. In my opinion it opens the view to the woman and gives her more importance and the scenery more depth. I'm looking forward to your reviews.
  Created and uploaded by Ankur Tambde - Derived version uploaded and nominated by -- Radomianin (talk) 23:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 23:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:32, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Haus-Feldwespe (Polistes dominula) Nest focus stack-20230607-RM-121713.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 21:44:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Haus-Feldwespe (Polistes dominula) Nest focus stack-20230607-RM-121713.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Haus-Feldwespe (Polistes dominula) Nest focus stack-20230607-RM-121713.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Hymenoptera#Family : Vespidae (Hornets, Paper Wasps, Potter Wasps, and Yellowjackets)
•  Info
  created & uploaded by Ermell - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 21:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tomer T (talk) 21:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Really fascinating, awesome details. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:11, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 02:33, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Treppenhauses Holstenhof (2).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 21:32:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Treppenhauses Holstenhof (2).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Treppenhauses Holstenhof (2).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Germany
•  Info
  created & uploaded by GZagatta - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 21:32, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tomer T (talk) 21:32, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:37, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Post office of Mont-de-Marsan (3).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 19:20:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Post office of Mont-de-Marsan (3).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Post office of Mont-de-Marsan (3).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
•  I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:20, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Tomer T (talk) 21:29, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Town hall of Mont-de-Marsan (6).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 19:14:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Town hall of Mont-de-Marsan (6).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Town hall of Mont-de-Marsan (6).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#France
•  Info
  after nominated a set of images Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/Town hall of Mont-de-Marsan, there were many votes to nominate only this one photo, which I am doing here. Tournasol7 (talk) 19:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Damisela dominó (Dascyllus trimaculatus) en una anémona magnífica (Heteractis magnifica), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-18, DD 113.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 17:59:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Damisela dominó (Dascyllus trimaculatus) en una anémona magnífica (Heteractis magnifica), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-18, DD 113.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Damisela dominó (Dascyllus trimaculatus) en una anémona magnífica (Heteractis magnifica), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-18, DD 113.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Family_:_Pomacentridae_(Clownfish_and_Damselfish)
•  Info
  A juvenile threespot dascyllus (Dascyllus trimaculatus) of approx 4 centimetres (1.6 in) length in a magnificent sea anemone (Heteractis magnifica), Red Sea, Egypt. Dascyllus trimaculatus is native to the Indo-Pacific from the Red Sea and East Africa, to the Pitcairn Islands, southern Japan, and Australia, and can also be found in some parts of the Philippines. It feeds on algae, copepods and other planktonic crustaceans. Generally, adults are found in small groups around coral heads or large rocks. Juveniles (like in this case) may be found associated with large sea anemones or sheltering between the spines of diadema sea urchins or branching corals. The magnificent sea anemone is characterized by a flared oral disc, which reaches between 20 and 50 centimetres (7.9 and 19.7 in) in diameter. The numerous tentacles exceed 8 centimetres (3.1 in) long. It's widespread throughout the tropical and subtropical waters of the Indo-Pacific area, from the eastern coasts of Africa, the Red Sea included, to Polynesia and from south Japan to Australia and New-Caledonia. It has been observed down to 40 metres (130 ft) deep. The magnificent sea anemone has two feeding methods. The first one is through the photosynthesis of its symbiotic zooxanthellae, living in its tissues. The second method is through using its tentacles to stun, immobilize, and consume prey (small invertebrates, fry, or juvenile fish). Note: there are no FPs of the genus Dascyllus and genus Heteractis. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 17:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 18:57, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful and impressive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:55, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support +1 -- Radomianin (talk) 23:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Pilsum-LSG-Krummhoern--2022 05 msu-1.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 14:40:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Pilsum-LSG-Krummhoern--2022 05 msu-1.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Pilsum-LSG-Krummhoern--2022 05 msu-1.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Towers#Germany
•  Info
  created & uploaded by Matthias Süßen – nominated by Ivar (talk) 14:40, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support – Ivar (talk) 14:40, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 16:04, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Very nice but it's tilted in ccw direction (see sea horizon) Poco a poco (talk) 18:23, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --SHB2000 (talk) 21:36, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Wle Calafuria 11.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 08:53:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Wle Calafuria 11.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wle Calafuria 11.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Riserva_naturale_Calafuria>
•  Info
  created by Anna.Massini - uploaded by Anna.Massini - nominated by Anna.Massini -- (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 08:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- (⧼Anna Massini alias PROPOLI87⧽) (talk) 08:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Impressive. And even more impressive as I see it was taken with a smartphone. --LexKurochkin (talk) 16:03, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment I promoted this at QIC, but I'm unconvinced it's of FP quality. I will deliberate. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose FP potential, no doubt about it but half of the image is an uninteresting bush. The composition would have been much better using something like 100 m and focusing on the cliff. The quality is also low, no detail can be appreciated. Poco a poco (talk) 18:25, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:St. Amandus - Bad Urach 18.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Jun 2023 at 06:10:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:St. Amandus - Bad Urach 18.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:St. Amandus - Bad Urach 18.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Windows : Stained glass
•  Info
  Donor window, inscription: All aisle windows donated by Mrs. fabricant Feodora Groß née Paret in honor of her husband fabricant L. R. Groß † June 10, 1898, Collegiate church St. Amandus, Bad Urach, Baden-Württemberg, Germany; created by Llez - uploaded by Llez - nominated by Llez -- Llez (talk) 06:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Llez (talk) 06:10, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 07:02, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:08, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:09, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 16:05, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 17:48, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 17:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:26, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:01, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Head of Sri Lankan axis deer.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2023 at 19:40:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Head of Sri Lankan axis deer.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Head of Sri Lankan axis deer.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla
•  Info
  All by AntanO -- AntanO 19:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- AntanO 19:40, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Distracting background. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Oversharpened a bit, IMO. — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 10:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Resurrezione Bernardino Lucinio Lonato.jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2023 at 13:06:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Resurrezione Bernardino Lucinio Lonato.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Resurrezione Bernardino Lucinio Lonato.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic_media/Religion#Christianity
•  Info
  created and uploaded by Moroder - nominated as suggested by Ikan by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 13:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC) Exif data= X2D 100 C ISO 1600 120 mm f/6,3 1/15s.
•  Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 13:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Wow! Yann (talk) 14:20, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 14:24, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very strong nominee, as I said in QIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:31, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Bravissimo! Terragio67 (talk) 15:43, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Aristeas (talk) 16:17, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good image 20 upper 19:22, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 06:58, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:49, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:06, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:25, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 10:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 15:57, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:22, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:02, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa (Web Summit).jpg

Voting period ends on 27 Jun 2023 at 01:25:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa (Web Summit).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Marcelo Rebelo de Sousa (Web Summit).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
•  Info
  created by Web Summit - uploaded by Ser.Silv - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 01:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 01:25, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment At first glance I miss the usual fill light (or reflector), its absence make the shadows on the right side very deep and let the head merge visually into the background. On the other hand this protects the photo from being totally conventional. I am curious how others assess this … --Aristeas (talk) 10:07, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support per Julesvernex2 below – indeed this kind of lighting seems appropriate for a conservative politician. --Aristeas (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Weak oppose due to the vignetting on the bottom right. A pity, though; I'd have supported if this was not there. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I quite like the juxtaposition of a bold portrait for a conservative leaning president (a leaning mimicked by his tie, not sure if that was by chance or by choice!). A pity that the softbox is reflected on the eyes, though.

Is it safe to assume that the CC BY 2.0 license renders the 'All rights reserved' tag on the EXIF metadata void? --Julesvernex2 (talk) 17:32, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

That is the common Commons interpretation. It was discussed recently in this deletion request and confirmed by most of the people commenting and by the mod who closed the request. --Aristeas (talk) 05:44, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose The image appears to have some vignetting. 20 upper 19:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Eucomis kuiflelie. 07-06-2023. (d.j.b).jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Jun 2023 at 04:34:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Eucomis kuiflelie. 07-06-2023. (d.j.b).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Eucomis kuiflelie. 07-06-2023. (d.j.b).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Asparagaceae
•  Info
  Detail of a Eucomis (crested lily). The crest develops from the beautiful mottled stem. Focus stack of 16 photos.
  All by -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Famberhorst (talk) 04:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:51, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Aristeas (talk) 09:35, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 11:19, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Yes. 20 upper 19:28, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 06:51, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:53, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 09:25, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ivar (talk) 17:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:03, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Отбор проб грунта.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2023 at 19:26:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Отбор проб грунта.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Отбор проб грунта.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
•  Info
  Soil sampling from the bottom of the glacial fjord lake (Lake Spartakovskoe) / Created by Nestortech45 - uploaded by Nestortech45 - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 19:26, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- JukoFF (talk) 19:26, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Photographer wasn't taking the shot for FPC. Foreground too messy. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:56, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
  • You're right, the photographer probably didn't even know that Wikimedia Commons existed until after the photo was uploaded. JukoFF (talk) 22:09, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Charles. Also, very little if anything is sharp. Probably a good and useful VI if nominated, though. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:37, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Would have supported this if the foreground was much more cleaner. --SHB2000 (talk) 00:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I like it. Doesnt have to be staged shot - People at work. --Mile (talk) 06:01, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak support Like Mile, I think the fact it wasn't staged for FPC is a positive, and it has good educational value. But the OOF white thing bottom right is a little distracting, hence the weak support. BigDom (talk) 08:31, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Bags are distracting 20 upper 09:20, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak support --Lupe (talk) 10:15, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral IMHO it’s OK that much is OOF – after all, the photo is similar to an envionmental portrait –, but it’s unfortunate that of all things the irritating bags at the left are quite sharp and that we see the open camera bag at the bottom – it is probably not part of the soil sampling, is it? --Aristeas (talk) 09:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak support -- Karelj (talk) 16:46, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Charles and 20upper — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 10:45, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Нейрохирургическая операция в Институте Склифосовского.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2023 at 19:14:56 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Нейрохирургическая операция в Институте Склифосовского.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Нейрохирургическая операция в Институте Склифосовского.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#People at work
•  Info
  Neurosurgical surgery to remove a brain metastasis at the Sklifosovsky Institute (Moscow) / Created by Sklifosovsky Insitute - uploaded by Sklifosovsky Insitute - nominated by JukoFF -- JukoFF (talk) 19:14, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- JukoFF (talk) 19:14, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Question A staged promotional shot? Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:59, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Sklifosovsky Insituteitute is the main trauma center of a city with a population of 10 million people, there is no time to take staged photographs, you can see other shots uploaded by this author and make sure of it))) JukoFF (talk) 22:05, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose As a photo of neurosurgery, it completely fails unfortunately. We can't even see the patient, never mind any actual surgery taking place (if indeed there is any, per Charles' question above). BigDom (talk) 21:13, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
  • Are you sure it's ethical to show a patient whose head is being cut open? Maybe don't answer that is a rhetorical question) JukoFF (talk) 22:07, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
    • Like Ikan says, it definitely could be ethical, consent is the key. Maybe if the photo were presented as simply surgeons at work, I could understand, but when the title says neurosurgery and the description says brain metastasis, but we can see neither, then it just doesn't work for me, I'm sorry. BigDom (talk) 08:36, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I agree that it fails as a photo of neurosurgery, per BigDom, but it succeeds as a composition and has drama. It's really a photo of medical staff who are conducting neurosurgery, not a photo of the surgery or the patient. As for whether it would be ethical to show a photo of the patient: Yes, but only if they were asked and signed a release form before the operation, while they were still clear-headed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:06, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 08:14, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan Kekek. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Heroes at work :) 20 upper 09:21, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 14:13, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan Kekek --LexKurochkin (talk) 22:00, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 08:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 06:52, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:58, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:03, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:06, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Coral plato (Danafungia scruposa), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-15, DD 49.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2023 at 17:25:50 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Coral plato (Danafungia scruposa), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-15, DD 49.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Coral plato (Danafungia scruposa), mar Rojo, Egipto, 2023-04-15, DD 49.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Anthozoa
•  Info
  Coral (Danafungia scruposa), Red Sea, Egypt. They are around 25 centimetres (9.8 in) in diameter and normally eat a variety of food from bacteria to mesozooplankton measuring 1 mm in diameter, although researchers observed the coral consuming the jellyfish Aurelia aurita. This was the first time such behaviour has been seen in the wild and it's not known how the coral captures jellyfish. Its polyps have diameters of up to 24 centimetres (9.4 in) and are oval or circular. D. scruposa is found in the eastern and western Indian Ocean, the eastern central, northwestern and western central Pacific Ocean, Japan, the East China Sea, the Red Sea, and eastern Australia. It's found at depths between 1 and 27 metres (3 ft 3 in and 88 ft 7 in) on the slopes of reefs. Note: we have no FPs of the whole family Fungiidae. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 17:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 17:25, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment I see purple CA as halos on top of the right and left side of the coral. I'm not promising a vote if it's corrected, but it should be corrected if I'm not mistaken in what I'm seeing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:54, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

• Ikan Kekek:  Done, thank you for the hint Poco a poco (talk) 10:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Thanks. I think it's unfortunate that you couldn't get more of the coral in your depth of field, but enough of it is quite sharp and detailed at life size to deserve a feature, I think. If the nomination doesn't succeed, it would certainly be likely to be a fine VI. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:26, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --Llez (talk) 14:22, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 14:23, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I love corals. 20 upper 19:27, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support FP-worthy to me, even if the depth of field is limited. The photo is educative and the subject well-illuminated. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:18, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Sommet de la Dune du Pilat.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2023 at 14:34:37 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Sommet de la Dune du Pilat.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sommet de la Dune du Pilat.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/France#Nouvelle-Aquitaine
•  Info
  On the Dune of Pilat, Arcachon Bay area, France. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 14:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Milseburg (talk) 14:34, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment That's nice. How do people feel about the trees leaning to the left going up? Is that OK? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 18:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Would be better without footprints. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Euthrix potatoria caterpillar

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2023 at 05:54:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page

• 

  Side view

• 

  Dorsal view

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family_:_Lasiocampidae_(Eggars,_lappets)
•  Info
  all by -- Ivar (talk) 05:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ivar (talk) 05:54, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Not my favorite creatures but OK. 20 upper 07:03, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Excellent. --Aristeas (talk) 07:12, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Detailed! --SHB2000 (talk) 11:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Ermell (talk) 13:50, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:30, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 04:29, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:24, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Question Where are the lot of white spots all over the body - some are sharp, others unsharp - coming from? --Llez (talk) 13:53, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

  Llez please annotate. The body has yellow spots, white small spots are pollen. -- Ivar (talk) 18:29, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 06:54, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support for the set. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:01, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 19:24, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Echium candicans at Montado do Paredão in Curral das Freiras, Câmara de Lobos, Madeira, 2023 May.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Jun 2023 at 02:04:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Echium candicans at Montado do Paredão in Curral das Freiras, Câmara de Lobos, Madeira, 2023 May.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Echium candicans at Montado do Paredão in Curral das Freiras, Câmara de Lobos, Madeira, 2023 May.jpg

• Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Boraginaceae
•  Info
  created & uploaded by User:Ximonic - nominated by User:Ikan Kekek -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support This is another in Ximonic's series of photos of Madeira. These flowers are wonderfully colorful and sharply photographed in a lovely background among other flowers. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 04:23, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support this plant is a bumblebee magnet. -- Ivar (talk) 05:59, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Lovely flowers and amazing background. 20 upper 07:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support FP by all means. --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:04, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Wonderfully beautiful. Thank you for finding and highlighting this one, Ikan! --Aristeas (talk) 07:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• My pleasure! When I saw it on QIC, I knew it needed to be nominated. Thanks for refining the gallery. I didn't find anything that specific when I looked at COM:FP. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support I love the wave of Ximonic's new photos being nominated. I would have nominated this photo, but I already created two nominations currently active. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:21, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Schnobby (talk) 16:31, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay 💬 17:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Ermell (talk) 19:40, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 04:29, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:20, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 13:50, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:56, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Famberhorst (talk) 04:33, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 06:54, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 09:04, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support — Draceane ^talk_contrib. 10:47, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 19:23, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:11, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

File:2023-04-21 Motorsport, ABB FIA Formula E World Championship, Berlin E-Prix 2023 1DX 0666 by Stepro.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2023 at 18:28:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:2023-04-21 Motorsport, ABB FIA Formula E World Championship, Berlin E-Prix 2023 1DX 0666 by Stepro.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2023-04-21 Motorsport, ABB FIA Formula E World Championship, Berlin E-Prix 2023 1DX 0666 by Stepro.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Sports#Motorsports
•  Info
  Motorsports, ABB FIA Formula E World Championship, Berlin E-Prix 2023: Pascal Wehrlein (GER, TAG Heuer Porsche Formula E Team) is racing in front of a historical troop carrier; created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
•  Support -- Stepro (talk) 18:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment When you first look at it it looks as if that car is parked. I guess no panning to get the plane in focus. Unfortunately 1/5000 sec and high ISO means little definition/sharpness, but I've never photographed cars racing so apologies if my remarks are unreasonable. (ps it's very bright) Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:02, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Motorsport yeah, put that thing in sports......20 upper 07:01, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too busy to work for me. Also, light is a little harsh and WB a little too cool. Daniel Case (talk)

File:2022-05-22 50. Internationales Dixieland Festival Dresden 1DX 2056 by Stepro-2.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2023 at 18:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:2022-05-22 50. Internationales Dixieland Festival Dresden 1DX 2056 by Stepro-2.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:2022-05-22 50. Internationales Dixieland Festival Dresden 1DX 2056 by Stepro-2.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
•  Info
  50th International Dixieland Festival Dresden: Allotria Jazz Band on the open-air stage 'Junge Garde', close-up of musician with trombone; created, uploaded and nominated by Stepro
•  Support -- Stepro (talk) 18:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Just a man playing an instrument, nothing exceptional here. 20 upper 07:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good portrait of a musician at work, strong facial expression. --Aristeas (talk) 07:18, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 07:47, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose It's that expression, that look that probably anyone who's ever picked up a camera and pointed it at another person will recognise - they have spotted you and are looking through the lens and into your soul. For me, it just takes the musician out of the "zone" and spoils the wow, I'm sorry. BigDom (talk) 15:35, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose per 20 upper. -- Karelj (talk) 21:11, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Would be a nice pose, but BigDom explains why it's not featurable. Many of our best—many of the best, indeed—photos of musicians capture that look in the eye that they get when they're absorbed in the music (to the point that many great musicians often have their eyes tightly closed when they're playing at their most intense; my late brother (who I often saw doing that while he played the piano, said it was about seeing the notes clearly). This guy lost that. Daniel Case (talk) 20:06, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Philippe Chaperon by Atelier Nadar.jpg

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2023 at 17:04:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Philippe Chaperon by Atelier Nadar.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Philippe Chaperon by Atelier Nadar.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
•  Info
  created by Atelier Nadar - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:04, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Info
  Fun fact: He has articles on six Wikipedias, and the worst is the French Wikipedia article, barely a stub and a gallery, which is weird, given he's French. Farsi and Egyptian Arabic have slightly more bulked up stubs, and the short but reasonably substantial English, Italian, and Belarussian articles appear to be pretty similar, probably translations. Adam Cuerden (talk) 17:06, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Nice portrait. Yann (talk) 18:24, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:00, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Portrait could be higher quality; just saying. 20 upper 08:14, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  @20 upper: I'd say it's pretty darn good for the 19th century myself, but alright. Not sure how that comment's helpful, given Chaperon's been dead for 117 years, making it very hard to get a new photo. Adam Cuerden (talk) 08:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Adam Cuerden: IMO, the image is of good quality but.....it's not up to standards. 20 upper 08:37, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  @20 upper: Well,I'm not the universal arbitrator, and that's... fair if that's your opinion, but more detail about what you don't like would help judge other photos. Adam Cuerden (talk) 10:21, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  Not everyone has to approve restored images as suitable for Commmons FP status, Adam. Would the noise on this image, for instance, look the same if you examined a 19th Century print with a magnifying glass? Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:53, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  Pretty much, aye; might vary depending on lighting because texture shows up differently in different light and angles. I mean, the originaæ (File: Philippe Chaperon by Atelier Nadar - Original.jpg is a 19th century print, so compare at will. I'm pretty careful with trying to keep texture; I don't use filters. But 20 upper didn't say what the issue was, other than a vague quality statement, which is why I was asking. I'd like to know people's thoughts on these things, because, whether I agree with objections or not, I'd like to understand them. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:30, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --Aristeas (talk) 17:59, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ivar (talk) 08:00, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Christian Ferrer ^(talk) 04:31, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 13:46, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 08:59, 19 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 02:06, 20 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Remarkable Rocks 02.jpg

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2023 at 07:41:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Remarkable Rocks 02.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Remarkable Rocks 02.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Australia#South Australia
•  Info
  created and uploaded by Bgag - nominated by SHB2000 --SHB2000 (talk) 07:41, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --SHB2000 (talk) 07:41, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 10:27, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Detail resolution could be higher, but it’s an impressive photo of an impressive rock, and the contrast of the rock colours with the sky is nice. --Aristeas (talk) 14:48, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:50, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Aristeas. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:28, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Ermell (talk) 20:53, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Aristeas. Greater sharpness is also imaginable, but in 2023, I consider this an FP, and it was taken in 2015. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:27, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Good image but not Featured material. 20 upper 08:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

   Question Could you clarify by what you mean by "not featured material"? Are you suggesting that there's a lack of wow factor (perfectly fine, btw). SHB2000 (talk) 11:39, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

@SHB2000: That is what I mean, yes. By the way, I'm wondering why you didn't correct my misspelling. 20 upper 06:49, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

Because it's bad karma to edit other people's messages except in egregious cases (and your misspelling/typo and your random use of capitalization is not). --SHB2000 (talk) 11:23, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --Stepro (talk) 18:35, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:56, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:51, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Question Can you eliminate the halos around the rocks? --Llez (talk) 13:40, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Looks like a set from the original Star Trek. Daniel Case (talk)

File:Working hands. Bizzilla, or traditional maltese lace-making.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2023 at 19:32:24 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Working hands. Bizzilla, or traditional maltese lace-making.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Working hands. Bizzilla, or traditional maltese lace-making.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Others
•  Info
  created and uploaded by Renata Apan - nominated by Kritzolina -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:32, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support One more find from WLF - Maltese lace-making is a dying craft, this image captures it perfectly in my opinion -- Kritzolina (talk) 19:32, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good focus on the hands at work; photos like this give a lively description of old crafts. --Aristeas (talk) 14:47, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:52, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 18:29, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I think we need more FPs showing handicrafts and other folk traditions. This is also likely to be a Valued Image if nominated in the right scope, but I haven't checked other photos in scope. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:29, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:53, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Schnobby (talk) 08:20, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not seeing the quality of this image. 20 upper 08:28, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Famberhorst (talk) 04:52, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very educational. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:22, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 13:38, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 20:01, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Chiesa di Santa Maria Assunta volta virtù del presbiterio Manerba del Garda.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2023 at 11:57:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Chiesa di Santa Maria Assunta volta virtù del presbiterio Manerba del Garda.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chiesa di Santa Maria Assunta volta virtù del presbiterio Manerba del Garda.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings/Ceilings#Italy
•  Info
  All by Moroder -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:57, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Wolfgang Moroder (talk) 11:57, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Lovely ceiling! --SHB2000 (talk) 10:58, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Impressive photo of an impressive ceiling. I hate to say it but some parts of the dome seem softer than others; but when I downscale the photo to a reasonable size, e.g. 4000 × 4000px, the complete photo is very sharp, thus it’s good for me. Because the photo shows the whole ceiling, it fits IHMO better into our Religious buildings/Ceilings gallery than into our Non-photographic media/Religion gallery; therefore I have taken the liberty to change the gallery link. --Aristeas (talk) 14:42, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 18:31, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:05, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support It's just too good. 20 upper 08:33, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:26, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:58, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry, but I cannot see that special or wow here. The angle isn't ideal, and in my opinion we have already more than a hundred better featured pictures of church ceilings. --Stepro (talk) 22:29, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 13:38, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 19:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I agree with Stepro, the ligthing and composition/POV are not at FP level to me. Poco a poco (talk) 06:57, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Horace Wilkinson Bridge ("New Bridge"), Baton Rouge, Louisiana at sunset, January 2023.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2023 at 02:05:05 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Horace Wilkinson Bridge ("New Bridge"), Baton Rouge, Louisiana at sunset, January 2023.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Horace Wilkinson Bridge ("New Bridge"), Baton Rouge, Louisiana at sunset, January 2023.jpg

2930

2089

108

566

3995

2663

Blurred left of this line, sharp right of it

58

2105

2971

549

3995

2663

blurred ?

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#United States of America
•  Info
  created by User:WClarke - uploaded by User:WClarke - nominated by WClarke -- wclarke 02:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Picture I liked that took of this bridge back in January. Shot this on a Mamiya 7 with Portra 400 and then scanned it digitally -- I think the film definitely provided some interesting, yet still accurate, colors I couldn't get from my DSLR. It was a beautiful sunset. Would love to hear what y'all think. -- wclarke 02:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks for nominating your shot! I really like the colors. I also like the Portra 400 film grain – we don't have many people these days who nominate film shots. However, you might consider applying some noise correction in post. The compositional weight is a bit too heavy on the right for my taste, but that's easy to correct with a tighter crop on the left. I'm always thrilled when people post their photos here who're not part of the same group of old regulars. So, please feel free to nominate more images! All the best, --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 03:55, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support  Neutral Great analog capture whose film grain is charming. From time to time I still take pictures with my old Praktica LTL2. When the photo prints are ready, I'm all the more pleased with a successful shot. This increases the appreciation for a single image.  Comment In the lower quarter of the image, a part of the water surface is blurred. This may be a post-processing mistake that can be fixed. -- Radomianin (talk) 06:53, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Additional comment I'm very sorry, as long as the blurry area in the bottom quarter is not fixed, I'm changing my vote to Neutral to be on the safe side. Dear WClarke, I hope you receive the ping: Fixing the above mentioned presumed post-processing mistake would be great to save this nomination. Many thanks in advance for your efforts. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 19:05, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Indeed. I love this photo and would love to vote for it, but there is an abrupt transition between sharp and unshap in the foreground water, as spotted by Radomianin. I have tried to mark the right border with an image note. As this is very likely a post-procession mistake, it should be possible to fix this. Please give it a try, this great photo deserves some extra work. --Aristeas (talk) 08:28, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 07:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Question How would you feel about decreasing the noise (grain) in this digital version? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:37, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose per my remarks and others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:57, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment Putting the nostalgia to one side, the noise in the sky is too great e.g. top left. As it is, the end result is not one of our finest. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:44, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment User:WClarke could you write what film was used and to fill manual EXIF ? That would be great. --Mile (talk) 08:52, 13 June 2023 (UTC) p.S. Do you have any drum scanner there, this is worth to try.
•  Support OK, I guess it's good enough. 20 upper 08:39, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Question To clarify: good enough to be one of the best photos on the site? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 14:57, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Ikan Kekek: Definitely but it's on the lower end of the hierarchy. 20 upper 06:53, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• Fair enough. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:19, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:24, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I would support but some kind of mistake was done, and large area of sea in start is "unfocused". Maybe film wasnt paralel. --Mile (talk) 17:57, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The foreground is blurry, otherwise very good. -- Ivar (talk) 06:02, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral The graininess and the sudden shift in sharpness on the water in the foreground need to be dealt with. Daniel Case (talk) 19:04, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Filarmonica de MG 097.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2023 at 01:31:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Filarmonica de MG 097.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Filarmonica de MG 097.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Events or Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Brazil
•  Info
  created by Gladstone Campos - uploaded by Filarmonicamg - nominated by Arion -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 01:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- 😄 ArionEstar 😜 01:31, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support — Rhododendrites ^talk |  20:27, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Great lighting, and the uncorrected perspective distortion gives it a sense of scale --Julesvernex2 (talk) 14:01, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Julesvernex2. --Aristeas (talk) 14:33, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --BigDom (talk) 16:35, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 07:57, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose No, the image is not Featured material. 20 upper 08:41, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Question By any chance, is it possible to make this image more centred? --SHB2000 (talk) 11:38, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment As an orchestral musician, I'm not bowled over by this, though it's a good photo and a potential VI. However, the cello soloist really should be identified in the file description. My opinion is that this kind of photo would be more impressive if the audience weren't quite so much in the dark, and there is sometimes a bit more house lighting, depending on the hall, though the audience being in the dark during the performance is the rule for the last century or so. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:59, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I like the contrast and the symmetry. Daniel Case (talk) 19:02, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not a special orchestra photo. The majority of the musicians do not play.--Ermell (talk) 22:14, 19 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Calligrapha fulvipes 275169890.jpg

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2023 at 00:22:43 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Calligrapha fulvipes 275169890.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Calligrapha fulvipes 275169890.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods#Family_:_Chrysomelidae_(Leaf_Beetles)
•  Info
  created by Zygy - uploaded by Nosferattus - nominated by Nosferattus -- Nosferattus (talk) 00:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Nosferattus (talk) 00:22, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Dislike the glare. --SHB2000 (talk) 01:02, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose and the size and lack of sharpness. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
  • @Charlesjsharp: Calligrapher beetles are generally quite tiny, so it's unlikely to get a photograph with the entire organism in sharp focus. All the important features of the beetle, however, are sharp here. I think some leeway should be given for subjects this small (while still conforming to the minimum criteria). It's fine if you still choose to oppose, but I hope you will consider the limitations of macro photography when evaluating candidates. Cheers! Nosferattus (talk) 18:19, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
    • I have experience of the limitations of macro photography. I've not got an FP of a beetle this small. I can't see any EXIF data, so I don't know your camera/lens/settings. It's in focus, but it's not sharp. I imagine you have had to perform a big crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:11, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
      • @Charlesjsharp: So in cases like this, would you prefer more sharpness/resolution even if it meant sacrificing some depth of field (presumably by increasing magnification and/or tightening the aperture)? For example, what do you think of images like these (ignoring the watermarks): [1][2]? Would you consider those to be featured picture caliber (if they didn't have watermarks)? Nosferattus (talk) 01:00, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
        • Sharpness and dof are independent variables. Please share your EXIF. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:43, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
          • I assume you're referring to the use of focus stacking? Without it, they are not independent: decreasing aperture will increase depth-of-field at the expense of sharpness, due to diffraction; increasing magnification to fill a larger portion of the frame with the bug will decrease the (effective) aperture, again affecting sharpness due to diffraction. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 12:25, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I don't think this is quite up to current FP standards for macro photography. There's no EXIF to double-check, but I assume the softness is the result of a small aperture and/or a large crop? The best macro images we've seen around here lately are either focus stacks or those that use the limited depth of field to draw the observer's attention to a particular element (e.g. the eye of an insect or a flower's anthems) --Julesvernex2 (talk) 12:37, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I don't get why this image has so many opposes, it's class. 20 upper 08:43, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose per Jules. And general dullness. Daniel Case (talk) 18:59, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Dingy skipper (Erynnis tages baynesi) male Burren.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2023 at 21:03:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Dingy skipper (Erynnis tages baynesi) male Burren.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Dingy skipper (Erynnis tages baynesi) male Burren.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Hesperiidae (Skippers)
•  Info
  There are 19 FPs of Hesperiidae (skipper butterflies): all are Hesperiinae. This is a spread-winged skipper (Pyrginae); this subspecies can only be found in the Burren, County Clare, Ireland. Many thanks to Jesmond Harding, author of The Irish Butterfly Book, for a precise grid reference. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:03, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:04, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:39, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --BigDom (talk) 20:48, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good enough -- 20 upper 08:46, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 11:44, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 13:34, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Moth Tongue and Eye.jpg

Voting period ends on 21 Jun 2023 at 09:50:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/image:Moth Tongue and Eye.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/image:Moth Tongue and Eye.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera
•  Info
  all by-- fedaro (talk) 09:50, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- fedaro (talk) 09:50, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Question What species of moth are we looking at here, and is it upside-down? BigDom (talk) 06:33, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

  Not if the moth posed for the photo. The species? on Wikipedia you can see that it is a heterocera. fedaro (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

  "Heterocera" is not a species, it's a paraphyletic grouping of over 100,000 species. BigDom (talk) 16:14, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment The eye is great but the white 'halos' are very distracting. The orientation is strange. Perhaps it is dead? I guess it is stacked? What species is it? Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:52, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

  Not if the moth posed for the photo. The species? on Wikipedia you can see that it is a heterocera. fedaro (talk) 22:17, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Unhelpful response. The image is uncategorized on Commons. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:01, 14 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Please add more categories. --Yann (talk) 18:32, 14 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good quality but not exceptional. 20 upper 08:48, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

• 20 upper, that reads like an oppose reason. Did you mean to support? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:43, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

  @Ikan Kekek: It's all in the head; it depends on how you interpret the logic, albeit I did intend to support rather than to oppose. Although the image doesn't seem very remarkable to me, its quality overcomes that. 20 upper 06:19, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

• That's clearer, thanks. The way you phrased it suggested an opposing vote, because featured pictures are supposed to be exceptional in some way. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 07:20, 16 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Currently uncategorized. --SHB2000 (talk) 11:39, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:22, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Technically well done, but confusing and busy ... without the filename I'd have no idea what this was and what I was supposed to be looking at. Daniel Case (talk) 03:40, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment I would, but the fact remains that "Moths" is not a very informative category. What species of moth is it, as asked above? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose At the very least, this is insufficiently described and categorized to be an FP. Part of what makes photos FPs is that they are educational. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:58, 18 June 2023 (UTC)

File:Thomas Mundy Peterson by William R. Tobias.jpg

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 20 Jun 2023 at 01:38:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Thomas Mundy Peterson by William R. Tobias.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Thomas Mundy Peterson by William R. Tobias.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People/Portrait#Men
•  Info
  created by William R. Tobias - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:38, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 01:38, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support What an important person! And more's the shame that I'd never heard of him. Excellent photo and well restored. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:01, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Schnobby (talk) 07:57, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Radomianin (talk) 08:32, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 11:00, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan. --Aristeas (talk) 08:05, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per others. Just wondering, what's the rationale for including the mount, rather than just having the photograph itself? BigDom (talk) 08:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

  @BigDom: It's a souvenier of the event that presented the medal, so it's a meaningful object. There is a cropped version (with some work on fixing up the edges) in the other versions for uses that are better without. Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:07, 13 June 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 10:29, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --GRDN711 (talk) 11:43, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 14:24, 13 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Not seeing anything exceptional here. 20 upper 08:55, 15 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Daniel Case (talk) 04:10, 16 June 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 13:32, 17 June 2023 (UTC)

Timetable (day 5 after nomination)

Thu 15 Jun → Tue 20 Jun
Fri 16 Jun → Wed 21 Jun
Sat 17 Jun → Thu 22 Jun
Sun 18 Jun → Fri 23 Jun
Mon 19 Jun → Sat 24 Jun
Tue 20 Jun → Sun 25 Jun

Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)

Sun 11 Jun → Tue 20 Jun
Mon 12 Jun → Wed 21 Jun
Tue 13 Jun → Thu 22 Jun
Wed 14 Jun → Fri 23 Jun
Thu 15 Jun → Sat 24 Jun
Fri 16 Jun → Sun 25 Jun
Sat 17 Jun → Mon 26 Jun
Sun 18 Jun → Tue 27 Jun
Mon 19 Jun → Wed 28 Jun
Tue 20 Jun → Thu 29 Jun

Closing a featured picture promotion request

The bot

Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.

Manual procedure

Any experienced user may close requests.

1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
   Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
   featured or not featured
   For example:
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
   becomes
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
3. Save your edit.
4. If it is featured:
   • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
   • Also add the picture to an appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images.
   • Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
     • If it was an alternative image, use the subpage/com-nom parameter: For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
     • If the image is already featured on another wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
   • Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
     • The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
     • You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# - '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
   • Add == FP promotion ==
     {{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the Talk Page of the nominator.
5. As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
   {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
   Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request

1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
   Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
   '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
   (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
   delisted or not delisted
   For example:
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2023.
4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
   1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
   2. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night shots, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
      3. Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (d:Property:P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
   3. Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture in the gallery is not removed.
5. If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.

Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination

1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
   In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}}

2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
   not featured
   For example:
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
   becomes
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured ===
3. Save your edit.
4. Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
   {{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
   Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/June 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.