Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Wikipedia.

Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.

Promoting an image

If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets.

All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here.

The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results.

If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.

Delisting an image

A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section.

Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.

For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:.If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.

Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.

  • Note that delisting an image does not mean deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations.

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button.


Step 3:
Transclude and link

Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list (direct link).

How to comment for Candidate Images

  • Write Support, if you approve of the picture. A reason is optional.
  • Write Oppose, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image. If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.
  • You can weak support or weak oppose instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
  • If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write Speedy close followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.
Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes accordingly.
Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at full size (high-resolution) in an image editing program. Please note that the images are only displayed at thumbnail size on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.

How to comment for Delist Images

  • Write Keep, followed by your reasons for keeping the picture.
  • Write Delist, followed by your reasons for delisting the picture.
  • Write Delist and Replace if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.
  • You can weak keep, weak delist or weak delist and replace instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.
    • To change your opinion, strike it out (with <s>...</s>) rather than removing it.
Please remember to be civil, not to bite the newbies and to comment on the image, not the person.

You may find the glossary useful when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using {{FPCgloss}}.

Editing candidates

If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do not overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have been applied.

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

Gray contrast test image.svg
In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is properly adjusted. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Highlight test image.svg
Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.
Colortest.png
On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be very difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background.
Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration with a hardware monitor calibrator is recommended.
To see recent changes, purge the page cache.
FPCs needing feedback

Current nominations

Delist:Havasu Falls

Voting period ends on 30 Jun 2018 at 15:49:57 (UTC)

a picture of Havasu Falls in the Grand Canyon
Reason
Resolution is low, very pixelated and blurry. Don't think this meets our current standards for WP:FP
Articles this image appears in
List of waterfalls, List of waterfalls by type
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Havasu Falls 1a md.jpg
Nominator
« Gonzo fan2007 (talk) @



A pyrosome colony washed up into a California tide pool

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 23:06:15 (UTC)

OriginalPyrosoma atlanticum, a tunicate, or colony of zooids, in a tide pool in California
Reason
When I came across this in a tide pool near Monterey, California, I had no idea what it was. In fact, it is a pyrosome, a colony of little creatures that floats around the ocean, connected by a gelatinous "tunic". Strange things. I think EV is the main thing here -- we have very few pictures of these, and this one depicts its unusual form/texture pretty well, I think.
Articles in which this image appears
Pyrosoma atlanticum, Pyrosome
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Others
Creator
Rhododendrites
  • Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:06, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 13:11, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – nice photo but it doesn't have the alive-pop of the infobox photo in Pyrosome, puzzling! Bammesk (talk) 13:55, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • @Bammesk: FWIW that picture in the pyrosome article may not actually be a pyrosome. The file name called it a comb jelly, its description called it a salp, and it was in the pyrosome article. :) Still there because I'm not 100% certain but see this thread for more. This of course does not change that this picture is indeed by a tidepool and not a living specimen out in the open ocean. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 14:13, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I understand. I checked some google images... About "a tidepool and not a living specimen": is the nom image a good representation of a living pyrosome? (as opposed to a dead pyrosome) If you think it is, then this is a Support vote. Bammesk (talk) 14:40, 16 June 2018 (UTC) Bammesk (talk) 15:07, 16 June 2018 (UTC)



Astronaut Harrison 'Jack' Schmitt, American Flag, and Earth

Voting period ends on 23 Jun 2018 at 06:51:07 (UTC)

Original – During the last manned lunar mission, geologist Harrison Schmitt (the first scientist-astronaut) poses with the American flag, with the Earth as a backdrop.
Reason
High resolution, unique photograph, taken while wearing awkward and unforgiving equipment in an unforgiving environment. Has a free license. File has description.
Articles in which this image appears
Harrison Schmitt
FP category for this image
Space
Creator
NASA/Eugene Cernan
  • Support as nominatorKees08 (Talk) 06:51, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Great image with high EV, high quality. – Yann (talk) 11:12, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Are there other versions/frames? This one has a focussing error and/or camera shake, clearly seen in full size. (The scan is OK, since the fiduciary crosses are tack sharp.) --Janke | Talk 14:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
    Images. Closest equivalent would be this I reckon, but I think it is worse off. Thoughts? Kees08 (Talk) 07:24, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
    Looking at this: [1], I'd say it's a better choice, Schmitt is in focus, and there's no camera shake. If I were you, I'd close this nomination, and nominate that one instead... --Janke | Talk 09:04, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
    Hm, I am not a huge fan of the sun reflecting off the helmet in that one. I do see the camera shake when I zoom in. Just to make sure, you think the camera shake is worse than the helmet glare? Kees08 (Talk) 03:39, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
    Yes, I think the shake is worse than the glare. You don't see the face in either picture, anyway. Also, the tilted composition of this one is pretty awkward. --Janke | Talk 06:48, 18 June 2018 (UTC)



Battle of Dreux

Voting period ends on 22 Jun 2018 at 23:07:29 (UTC)

Original – The Battle of Dreux, France, was fought on 19 December 1562 between Catholics and Huguenots
Reason
high quality image used as a lead
Articles in which this image appears
Battle of Dreux
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/War
Creator
Perrissin and Tortorel
  • Support as nominatorYann (talk) 23:07, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Is the category OK? Yann (talk) 23:08, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – leaning to support but too much contrast correction, too bright, IMO. Bammesk (talk) 03:38, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Bammesk: The background is supposed to be white, yet there is no white pixel in the background. Yann (talk) 11:52, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • The background (in the drawing area) [2] has a fine shade, that shade is too muted in the restoration IMO. Also the physical paper (the border) has a texture, I think retaining some of that texture could be an improvement. Bammesk (talk) 01:54, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – Nice. Better than grayscale. (sidenote: FYI, I would also support a brighter version, somewhere between the initial nom version and what you have now. Also would support less color saturation.) Bammesk (talk) 13:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC)



Nominations — to be closed

Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.

Older nominations requiring additional input from users

These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.

Closing procedure

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  3. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the June archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  4. If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.
  5. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

When promoted, perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
    • Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
    Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Add the image to:
  3. Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
    The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
  4. Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
  5. Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
  6. If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
  7. Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  8. If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
  9. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
  10. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the June archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
  11. If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.

Delist closing procedure

Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.

If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

  1. Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
  2. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  3. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  4. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Retained section of the archive.
  5. Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.

If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.
  4. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  5. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} page to the bottom of the Delisted section of the archive.

If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:

  1. Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
    {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
    • Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
    • Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
  2. Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
  3. Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
  4. Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
  5. Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.
  6. Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
  7. Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Replaced section of the archive.

Recently closed nominations

Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.

Antonin Artaud

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2018 at 15:26:49 (UTC)

Original – Antonin Artaud
Reason
high quality image of a famous artist, used a lead image
Articles in which this image appears
Antonin Artaud, List of atheist authors
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
Creator
unknown; uploaded, stiched and restored by JLPC
  • Support as nominatorYann (talk) 15:26, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • A bit fuzzy, but considering the date, I'll support it. Kaldari (talk) 00:02, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Some serious motion blur. By the 20s, exposure times had gotten down to the point where such a problem shouldn't happen in a professional setting.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:26, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment@Yann: I uploaded a sharper version on top of the existing image. I now see that the image is assessed in Commons, so I probably shouldn't have done that. Please review and take action if necessary. Feel free to upload the sharpened version as a new file. Bammesk (talk) 17:55, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – technically not high quality, but an exception for it being a historic image applies IMO. Bammesk (talk) 02:53, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support this photo is almost 90 years old .... it is a rare document for me the quality for a photo of 1926 is good .... I do not think it would pass as an image of quality but as a cultural document is more than enough for me --LivioAndronico (talk) 20:10, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Er, make that 92 years old. Sca (talk) 14:14, 12 June 2018 (UTC)
you're right Sca,sorry ... I meant AT LEAST 90 --LivioAndronico (talk) 18:00, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:14, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:14, 19 June 2018 (UTC)



Closeup of Lilium 'Stargazer' (the 'Stargazer lily')

Voting period ends on 24 Jun 2018 at 02:42:57 (UTC)

Original – A high resolution well lit closeup of the Stargazer lily flower focussing on the stamen of the flower
Reason
A high resolution well lit closeup of the Stargazer lily flower focussing on the stamen of the flower
Articles in which this image appears
Stamen
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
Subhrajyoti
  • Support as nominatorSubhrajyoti07 (talk) 02:42, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Petals look blurry. DOF? Sca (talk) 13:47, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Yes. Though shot at f/[email protected] the focus was on the front stamen and hence blur in petals due to DOF - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:56, 14 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Good EV and I am ok with DOF, its a closeup of the stamens, petals are part of the bokeh, and bokeh's are supposed to be out of focus. But the crop (composition) is distracting, would be much better to show the base of the stamens where they attach to the rest of the flower. Also the colors are strong and look somewhat unnatural. Bammesk (talk) 14:15, 16 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – The crop has been changed to display the base of the stamens. The saturation has been dialed down. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 09:59, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Much better, looking at the petals they look posterized, not a lot of detail in the highlights, can that be improved or is that how it was shot? Bammesk (talk) 15:46, 17 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I went through the image few times over. There are some blown out highlights at the tips of the petal, also there does seem posterization which I am not sure why happened but its definitely there. I am now having second thoughts of having this picture nominated for FP and would like to withdraw it. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 02:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

Not promoted --Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 15:25, 19 June 2018 (UTC)



Bust of Redmond Barry

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 19 Jun 2018 at 08:13:02 (UTC)

Original – A marble bust of Sir Redmond Barry, . This bust was sculpted by the English-born Australian sculptor Charles Summers in 1860
Reason
Good quality marble bust, contemporary with the subject. Illustrates both the subject and the sculptor.
Articles in which this image appears
Redmond Barry, Charles Summers
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator
Bust: Charles Summers; photograph: Chris Woodrich
  • Support as nominator –  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:13, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 15:16, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: How high up is the bust displayed in situ? I would usually expect to view such objects from a more-or-less eye- or face-level angle. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:39, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
    • With stand, the bust was about 3–4 cm taller than me (if I'm remembering correctly).  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:45, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – is the face slightly out of focus? Bammesk (talk) 14:45, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – face looks slightly out of focus, but not too bad at full size (100%). It has EV in Charles Summers as the only example of his work. Bammesk (talk) 03:05, 13 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Scant EV. Subject and artist both shy on notability. Sca (talk) 13:39, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 12:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 12:30, 19 June 2018 (UTC)



Dark purple Trichoglottis

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2018 at 18:18:54 (UTC)

Original – Dark purple Trichoglottis orchid
Reason
Nominated recently (here). Updated based on feedback, but uploaded the new version shortly before the nomination period ended. I should've just opened another nomination at that point, probably. Alas. On the advice of someone who abstained last time, and since there were no opposes, I'll give this another shot.
It's a dark purple Trichoglottis orchid (Trichoglottis atropurpurea) at the Brooklyn Botanic Garden.
Articles in which this image appears
Trichoglottis atropurpurea, Trichoglottis
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
Rhododendrites
  • Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:18, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Pinging participants of the previous FPC: @Livioandronico2013, Crisco 1492, Bammesk, Marvellous Spider-Man, Tomer T, and Janke:Rhododendrites talk \\ 18:20, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support still  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 09:16, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose too dark and concerns of the lack of focus on the flowers. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:18, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support For me is fine --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:23, 7 June 2018 (UTC)4
  • Support although I do recognize a focusing issue on the flowers, it has very high EV. Mattximus (talk) 22:54, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 15:17, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I think the background is now too dark. It was better was good in this version: [3]. Also some cropping of the top and right sides would highlight the flowers as the main subject, I think it would be an improvement. Bammesk (talk) 14:43, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support A very lovely picture that adds a nice touch to the article as well. Goveganplease (talk) 01:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Dark purple Trichoglottis (70213s)c.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:21, 16 June 2018 (UTC)



William Henry Seward by Randolph Rogers, in Madison Square Park, New York City

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Jun 2018 at 23:27:38 (UTC)

Original – Statue of William Henry Seward in Madison Square Park
Reason
I'm happy with the sharpness of the monument itself, the colors of the plants/trees, and the park scene in the background. Technical quality and EV seem worth a shot at FPC.
Articles in which this image appears
William H. Seward, William Henry Seward (Rogers), and a cropped version of the same image is in Randolph Rogers and Madison Square and Madison Square Park
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator
Rhododendrites
  • Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:27, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - composition is very messy and restless. --Janke | Talk 11:58, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Yes, the composition is messy, but I don't see any way to address that. The statue is in a permanent location (and obviously a very busy one). We can't just up and move it.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:04, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Per Janke. Due to the setting in which it's found, it's not a good subject for main page promotion. Sca (talk) 13:29, 9 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I withdraw my nomination clearly not going anywhere. Thanks for the comments, all. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:07, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:39, 16 June 2018 (UTC)


St Wilfrids Church

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Jun 2018 at 18:10:19 (UTC)

Original – St Wilfrids Church
Reason
A masterpiece of a beautiful church in england
Articles in which this image appears
St Wilfrid's Church, Preston
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator
Mdbeckwith
  • Support as nominatorLivioAndronico (talk) 18:10, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Good photo, but not significant EV right now, because it is in the "gallery" section of the article. It would have more EV if it is moved to the "infobox" or to the "remodeling" section of the article. Bammesk (talk) 03:23, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 01:47, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 15:18, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:28, 14 June 2018 (UTC)



HMCS Saskatoon with CH-149 Cormorant

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2018 at 22:22:35 (UTC)

OriginalHMCS Saskatoon practices personnel transfers with a CH-149 Cormorant helicopter.
Reason
Lede image for the article HMCS Saskatoon (MM 709) with interesting action. The image is used in seven articles.
Articles in which this image appears
HMCS Saskatoon (MM 709), Royal Canadian Navy, Kingston-class coastal defence vessel, AgustaWestland CH-149 Cormorant, and four more.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water
Creator
Rayzlens
  • Support as nominatorPine 22:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. --Gnosis (talk) 16:01, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I'll eat my hat if this is the work of a random Wikimedia Commons contributor, who only ever uploaded this photo in this 2010 before never posting again. It's an aerial shot of a military exercise, and so highly unlikely to have been taken by a member of the public. I note that the image also lacks metadata. This is almost certainly a Canadian Government photo uploaded under a false claim. Nick-D (talk) 11:19, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Nick-D while it had crossed my mind that this could be a Canadian government photo, my quick Google search does not show this in top results which would be surprising if this is an official Canadian government photo. There are alternative explanations that would make sense, such as the photographer being a Canadian Armed Forces person or the employee of a government contractor who took this photo in a personal capacity. In the absence of evidence to the contrary, I think that AGF should apply here. --Pine 18:28, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • I don't see how anyone could take this image in a personal capacity, and the pattern of a single-use account posting a professional-grade image on Commons which has no metadata is almost always associated with a copyright violation. Nick-D (talk) 22:21, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • (That said, if it can be established that this is PD - for instance a US military image - then I'd definitely support it, as it's an excellent photo). Nick-D (talk) 23:12, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose must surely be military or military-authorized press image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:16, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment See c:Commons:Deletion requests/File:HMCS Saskatoon.jpg. Yann (talk) 15:23, 9 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:46, 13 June 2018 (UTC)



Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Jun 2018 at 14:44:07 (UTC)

[4] Original – Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim

Edit 1 – Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim
Reason
A high resolution image of this land mark Large Gautama Buddha statue in Ravangla, Sikkim
Articles in which this image appears
Buddha Park of Ravangla
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator
Subhrajyoti
  • Thank you LivioAndronico for your effort in improving the photo. I have taken the pointers here and added some additional changes and created the Edit 1 version. Pl share your views on the same. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 16:09, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support now, since brightness is fixed. The sky is still a bit ominous, though... --Janke | Talk 17:11, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Saturation may be a tad high for an overcast day, but I think this is still a good representation of this statue.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:23, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Colours do not seem natural. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:09, 4 June 2018 (UTC)
  • colours have been much improved, but the weather and technical quality, possibly limited by the camera's capabilities, are not FP. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:13, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose agree with Chris and Charles. I would change my vote to Support if saturation, and perhaps even contrast, are reduced. (the clothing of visitors at the base of the statue are too colorful, not real) Bammesk (talk) 02:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak opposePer previous two. Colors look over-manipulated to me. Saturation has been toned down but to me it still seems rather too pronounced. Sca (talk) 13:08, 5 June 2018 (UTC)Sca (talk) 13:41, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Thanks for the feedback received till now. I have created a slightly different version of the original uploaded picture as Edit 1. In this version the saturation and the global contrast has been dialed down a bit in line with the feedback. Also the sky looks more natural. The new version has been uploaded along with a link to the original image (at the top). Pl share your views - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:20, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – better now, I struck my oppose. At full size the bright boundary around earlobes is distracting, especially on left side, can it be improved? Bammesk (talk) 01:54, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Thanks for identifying. I have made some changes on the edges of both the ear lobes and some body part edges to rectify the issue. Pl check and let me know if the same has been resolved. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 02:44, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - @Brandmeister: [6] - Straight out of camera, Raw file converted without any adjustments/post processing applied to jpeg format as requested - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:33, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Ok, although I'd prefer less harsh retouching. Brandmeistertalk 16:18, 8 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 10:57, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:29, 13 June 2018 (UTC)



Billie Holiday by William P. Gottlieb

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 11 Jun 2018 at 17:30:48 (UTC)

OriginalBillie Holiday at the Downbeat Club in New York City. Photographed by William P. Gottlieb.
Reason
High resolution photograph of iconic singer by a famous photographer, fully restored
Articles in which this image appears
Song, Feminism, Billie Holiday, Women in music, 20th-century music, Billy Paul, Billie Holiday discography, Maryland Women's Hall of Fame, Something About the Night
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
Creator
William P. Gottlieb
  • Support as nominatorKaldari (talk) 17:30, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 11:24, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment It is only one of many images in the Wikipedia article and isn't the main one. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:40, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
    • I just switched it with the existing infobox image on the Billie Holiday article. It's also been the lead image at song and women in music since 2015, and the lead image at Billie Holiday discography since 2011. Although it's true we have several pictures of Billy Holiday, this is definitely the best one. Kaldari (talk) 02:36, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 14:04, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Nice image. I do wish that it had a little bit tighter of a crop on top or more space to the right... go reshoot it, will you? :) Regardless, it's a great pic. Thanks for restoring. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:33, 6 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Missvain (talk) 16:33, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Billie Holiday, Downbeat, New York, N.Y., ca. Feb. 1947 (William P. Gottlieb 04251).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:27, 11 June 2018 (UTC)



St. Joan of Arc Chapel

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 9 Jun 2018 at 21:12:40 (UTC)

Original – Joan of Arc chapel. A church from the 15th century, initially built in France, moved to New York in 1927, and then to Milwaukee, Wisconsin, in 1964.
Reason
high quality image as lead image
Articles in which this image appears
St. Joan of Arc Chapel
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Leroy Skalstad
  • Support as nominatorYann (talk) 21:12, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – nice and sharp. I don't know why the sky has a fine grain though!? Bammesk (talk) 02:54, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Yes the sky is weird. I had a similar problem (all over the image) when converting RAW using Photoshop CS6 rather than the latest Canon Digital Photo Professional software. 17:25, 31 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charlesjsharp (talkcontribs)
  • Comment I see the same grain all over. It's simply more noticeable in the sky. --Janke | Talk 05:35, 1 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support However if you want here [7] i have upload a version with lose noise and vignetting if you want --LivioAndronico (talk) 09:02, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Frankly a bit crowded, but given the layout of this chapel I don't see any way of avoiding it.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:24, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I uploaded a slightly denoised version and removed the fine grain. If anyone disagrees, just revert. Bammesk (talk) 02:53, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Needs one more, so here we go! ;-) --Janke | Talk 11:59, 7 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose The graining is much improved, but I don't see this as an FP composition. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:18, 8 June 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Joan of Arc chapel-2290483.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:37, 9 June 2018 (UTC)



Palestine sunbird

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2018 at 07:45:15 (UTC)

Reason
High quality image of a bird that barely stops while feeding. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Palestine sunbird
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 07:45, 28 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:40, 29 May 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportYann (talk) 21:08, 30 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Good composition, nice species. Brandmeistertalk 17:40, 31 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support colorful, its detailed — Preceding unsigned comment added by 118.185.152.34 (talk) 13:43, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
    Comment While IP's can comment on nominations, they can't cast !votes. So I struck it. Armbrust The Homunculus 17:31, 5 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Would likely support either way, but do you know what plant that is? — Rhododendrites talk \\ 23:36, 6 June 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:32, 7 June 2018 (UTC)



Bosc's fringe-toed lizards

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2018 at 07:36:37 (UTC)

OriginalBosc's fringe-toed lizards (Acanthodactylus boskianus asper) love bite as part of courtship ritual; Dana Biosphere Reserve, Jordan
Reason
Valuable illustration of behaviour in a high quality image. FP on Commons
Articles in which this image appears
Bosc's fringe-toed lizard, Courtship display
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator
Charlesjsharp

Promoted File:Bosc's fringe-toed lizards (Acanthodactylus boskianus asper) love bite.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:29, 7 June 2018 (UTC)



Sarawak state assembly building

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Jun 2018 at 03:04:34 (UTC)

Original – The Sarawak state legislative assembly building. It is significant as the landmark of the capital city Kuching and the place where all state assemblymen from all over Sarawak come here to debate and passing state laws. The roof of the building is similar to "Terendak", a hat specifically made by the ethnic Melanau group in Sarawak.
Reason
The image is clear at depicting the state assembly building which has a unique architecture and its landscape . It is also an icon of the state of Sarawak.
Articles in which this image appears
Sarawak, New Sarawak State Legislative Assembly Building, Sarawak State Legislative Assembly
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
CEphoto, Uwe Aranas
Thanks for the feedback. Added this image to other articles. Cerevisae (talk) 09:47, 28 May 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Kuching Sarawak Dewan-Undangan-Negeri-Sarawak-01.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 04:33, 7 June 2018 (UTC)



Closeup head shot of large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Jun 2018 at 16:40:45 (UTC)

Original – Closeup head shot of large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim
Alternate Image 1 – Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim
Alternate Image 2 – Large Gautama Buddha statue in Buddha Park of Ravangla, Sikkim - Front Telephoto Shot
Reason
Detailed and high resolution image of the given statue of Gautama Buddha situated in Ravangla, Sikkim
Articles in which this image appears
Buddha Park of Ravangla
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator
Subhrajyoti
  • Support as nominatorSubhrajyoti07 (talk) 16:40, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Sharp image but very awkward angle. Is it possible to shoot from straight ahead from a location further away (telephoto)? --Janke | Talk 19:36, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose as above. Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:41, 2 June 2018 (UTC)
New versions not FP quality. You need a nicer day! Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:41, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Well, I actually like Alt. 2 - the overcast lighting prevents blown highlights and sooty shadows. The sky could be better, admittedly. Some careful levels/curve editing could improve this one quite a bit, though - as is, it's too dark IMO. --Janke | Talk 11:03, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Comment - I have made levels/curve editing and some other minor adjustments as advised above. The edited photograph has been uploaded as a new version on the same image (Alternate Image 2). Pl share your views on this latest version. -Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 12:31, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
Definitely better now. Suggest you ask for this nom to be closed, and nominate the edited Alt 2 as a new nom. --Janke | Talk 13:50, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per Janke.  — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:22, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose would be nice to have the whole statue in frame, not just a part from strange angle. Mattximus (talk) 03:09, 3 June 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - I am submitting two alternate images of the same statue taken from a different position. Alternate Image 1 is in wide angle covering the entire statue and portion of the compound in which the same is situated. Alternate Image 2 is taken in telephoto from the front covering the entire statue in line with what is advised by Janke. Pl share your views on the alternate Images whichever one is more appropriate. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 07:52, 3 June 2018 (UTC)

Not promoted --Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:35, 3 June 2018 (UTC)



Delist and Replace: Dorothea Lange

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 May 2018 at 18:22:00 (UTC)

Current featured picture
New restoration.
Reason
The current version has several de-noising artifacts as well as overdarkened shadows and is of lower resolution. I've made a new restoration from the original TIFF scans of the negative from Library of Congress.
Articles this image appears in
Dorothea Lange, Rondal Partridge and more
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Lange car.jpg
Nominator
FakeShemp (talk)
  • DelistFakeShemp (talk) 18:22, 15 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Support delist & replace – but I prefer the full size original with no rotation (restored for artifacts of course). Bammesk (talk) 02:05, 16 May 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I note the reasons for the proposed change, but to me the older version is more visually accessible due to better contrast. Sca (talk) 16:01, 16 May 2018 (UTC)

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 08:54, 26 May 2018 (UTC)

  • There is not enough support to replace the current featured picture, but it can't retain that status, as it isn't used in any article curretly. Armbrust The Homunculus 08:54, 26 May 2018 (UTC)
  • The unrestored version has noticeably better sharpness, which is especially apparent in her face in comparison to the Lange article crop version. The restored image brings out a little more detail from the shadows, but the overall 'restored' image is decidedly fuzzier than the 'original'. DonFB (talk) 14:02, 26 May 2018 (UTC)


Suspended nominations

This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=846737242"
This content was retrieved from Wikipedia : http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates
This page is based on the copyrighted Wikipedia article "Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates"; it is used under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License (CC-BY-SA). You may redistribute it, verbatim or modified, providing that you comply with the terms of the CC-BY-SA