Commons:Featured picture candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
This project page in other languages:

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates 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, 2023, 2024 and current month.

For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

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:

  • 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 1

STEP 2

  • STEP 2
    STEP 2

STEP 3

  • STEP 3
    STEP 3

STEP 4

  • STEP 4
    STEP 4

STEP 5

  • STEP 5
    STEP 5

STEP 6

  • STEP 6
    STEP 6

STEP 7

  • STEP 7
    STEP 7

STEP 8

  • STEP 8 (last step)
    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}}

Galleries and FP categories: 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 An image will only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.

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 (~~~~).

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.

General rules

  1. 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.
  2. Nominations by anonymous contributors are welcome.
  3. Contributions to discussion by anonymous contributors are welcome.
  4. 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.
  5. Nominations do not count as votes. Support must be explicitly stated.
  6. 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.
  7. 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.
  8. Rules of the 5th day based on vote counts on day number 5 (day of nomination + 5):
    1. Pictures are speedy declined if they have fewer than two support votes.
    2. 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.) This does not apply to nominations containing at least one ‘Alternative’ image – because it is possible that another image can overtake the one in the lead during the last days, such nominations are never closed early.
    3. Once either speedy criterion is reached, the voting period is considered closed, and no more votes may be added.
  9. 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.
  10. Pictures tagged {{FPD}} (FP-Denied) may be removed from the list 24 hours after the tag was applied.
  11. 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:

  1. Appropriate license (of course)
  2. At least seven  Support votes (or 7  Delist votes for a delist) at the end of nine days
  3. Ratio of supporting/opposing votes at least 2/1 (a two-thirds majority); same for delist/keep votes
  4. 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.
  5. Only two active delisting nominations per user, which is in addition to the limit of two active regular nominations.

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.

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

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

File:Solar System collage.svg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 22:46:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Solar System diagram

File:Lorch (W.) - Kloster Lorch - Klosterkirche - Ansicht von SO (1).jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 21:47:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Brown creeper at a banding station (90455).jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 21:37:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Brown creeper in hand

File:Dudek chocholatý při krmení mláďat.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 19:06:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Upupa epops feeding young birds

File:Po dešti ve Středohoří.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 19:03:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Landscape of the České středohoří (Czech Central Highlands) after rain: hills Malý Křižák, Křižák, Brník, Srdov, Milá

File:Pellasimnia angasi 01.JPG

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 13:25:41 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Shell of an Angas's Volva, Pellasimnia angasi

File:Narrentag-Oberndorf 2024-Nachtumzug-07985.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 12:42:47 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Someone wearing a mask for a 2024 April fools parade in Oberndorf

File:Open wing position of Lexias dirtea (Fabricius, 1793) - Dark Archduke (Female) puddling on rotten Neolamarckia cadamba flowerWLB.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 12:38:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Open wing position of Lexias dirtea (Fabricius, 1793) - Dark Archduke (Female) puddling on rotten Neolamarckia cadamba flower

File:Open wing nutrient sucking position of Lexias dirtea (Fabricius, 1793) - Dark Archduke.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 12:14:58 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Open wing nutrient sucking position of Lexias dirtea (Fabricius, 1793) - Dark Archduke.

File:Monument to Genghis Khan.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 11:59:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Calavera of Frida Kahlo.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 01:36:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Calaveras of day of the dead in mexico.jpg

Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2024 at 01:16:34 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Gordon Parks - American Gothic.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2024 at 18:53:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Gordon Parks' American Gothic. Portrait of government cleaning woman Ella Watson.

File:Llao Llao Peninsula.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2024 at 18:11:53 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The Llao Llao Peninsula, between the Nahuel Huapi and Moreno Lakes near the Patagonian city of Bariloche, Argentina. The building in the middle is a nationally famous resort of the same name, from the 1930s.

File:Cesena - Piazza della Libertà e Campanile del Duomo - 2024-09-30 19-34-16 001.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2024 at 15:18:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Liberty square and the Cathedral, Cesena, Italy.

File:044 Olive baboon with baby on the back in the Serengeti National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2024 at 14:23:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Olive baboon with baby on the back in the Serengeti National Park

File:Pararescueman fast ropes out of a U.S. Air Force HH-60G Pave Hawk.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2024 at 13:40:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

A U.S. Air Force pararescueman, assigned to the 57th Rescue Squadron, fast ropes out of a U.S. Air Force HH-60G Pave Hawk, assigned to the 56th RQS, into the Adriatic Sea during exercise PR ACE Croatia 24 near Pula, Croatia, Sept. 13, 2024. Multinational exercises with allies and partners demonstrate and strengthen a shared commitment towards global security and stability

File:Woman centaur.jpg

Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2024 at 10:52:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

This is a cave painting of a Woman centaur in Tassili n'Ajjer in Algeria. I think it could be featured due to the rare and special subject: in fact did the Neolitic's painter saw it, imagined it or did he dreamed about? also you can see even her eye and the wind taking her hair behind.

File:Catedral, Segovia, España, 2024-06-14, DD 32-34 HDR.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 17:23:55 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Chapter house full of tapestries (work of Gerard Peemans, Flemish weaver, ca. 1625-1700) in the cathedral of Segovia, Spain.

File:Tour-Alty, a monument of architecture of the Altai Republic 02.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 16:57:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Shivaliks Snow Himalayas Aerial Jammu ed Jul24 A7CR 01943.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 16:11:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Mountains of Jammu region of India, including snow-capped ranges of the Himalayas, as seen from a Jammu-Delhi flight

File:Ферапонтов белозерский монастырь 1.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 12:52:14 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ferapontov Belozersky Monastery, Vologda, Russia

File:Close wing puddling of Libythea lepita Moore, 1858 - Common Beak WLB MG 3212.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 11:16:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Close wing puddling of Libythea lepita Moore, 1858 - Common Beak WLB MG 3212.jpg

File:Open wing basking of Chersonesia risa (Doubleday, 1848) - Common Maplet WLB MG 4406.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 11:06:15 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Open wing basking of Chersonesia risa (Doubleday, 1848) - Common Maplet WLB MG 4406.jpg

File:Scanning electron micrograph of a human H9 T cell infected with HIV virus particles.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 09:41:19 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

human H9 T cell

File:Zaadpeulen van goudenregen (Laburnum anagyroides), 31-08-2024. (d.j.b).jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 04:19:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Seed pods of a Laburnum anagyroides

File:Traditional hanok houses at golden hour in Bukchon Hanok Village in Seoul.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 01:47:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Traditional hanok houses at golden hour in Bukchon Hanok Village in Seoul
  •  Weak support It's a very nice photo, but I'm not a big fan of blown highlights. If any RGB color reaches 255 on a largish area, it becomes noticeable. I'll try to create notes for the file in a moment, to mark the areas. --Tupungato (talk) 14:58, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks, Tupungato, for your vote. Your image notes are so small that they are very difficult to find on the image. But I finally got them. I don't think these are "blow highlights" (meaning with totally white parts, like burnt) in a standard sRGB environment. In any case, if there were, I could fix them. -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:46, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Myeongjeongjeon seen through the wooden Gate Hyehwamun at Changgyeonggung Palace in Seoul.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 01:36:36 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Myeongjeongjeon seen through the wooden Gate Hyehwamun at Changgyeonggung Palace in Seoul

File:Gans Family Mausoleum Dome, Frankfurt, Germany.jpg

Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2024 at 00:31:06 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:074 Black-headed weaver gathering nest material at Kibale forest National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2024 at 13:41:17 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Black-headed weaver gathering nest material at Kibale forest National Park

File:28-2 Kalâa de Beni Hammad (2).jpg

Voting period ends on 29 Oct 2024 at 13:18:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Qal'at Bani Hammad was a fortified palatine city in Algeria. Now in ruins, in the 11th century, it served as the first capital of the Hammadid dynasty.

File:Kasbah Amridil enterance, Marocco (قصبة امريديل).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2024 at 17:38:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Kasbah Amridil enterance, Marocco (قصبة امريديل)

File:Blue-throated Barbet Sasatgre West Garo Oct24 A7CR 03684.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2024 at 13:50:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Blue-throated barbet, Meghalaya, India
LGTM,  Support --A.Savin 07:11, 20 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Monasterio de Curchi, Curchi, Moldavia, 2023-11-01, DD 105-107 HDR.jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2024 at 12:57:57 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Curchi Monastery, Curchi, Moldova

File:Lac Bersau (8).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2024 at 11:01:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Lac Bersau in commune of Laruns, Pyrénées-Atlantiques, France

File:Basilica dos Congregados (10).jpg

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2024 at 10:57:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Basílica dos Congregados in Braga, Braga District, Portugal

Voting period ends on 28 Oct 2024 at 03:14:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Black-crested bulbul, Sasatgre, Meghalaya
Confirmed results:
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:21, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Pycnonotidae (Bulbuls)

Voting period ends on 27 Oct 2024 at 21:48:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Jadeite Cabbage, National Palace Museum, Taiwan
Confirmed results:
Result: 12 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:18, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Sculptures#Sculptures indoors

File:Rom (IT), Brücke „Ponte Vittorio Emanuele II“ -- 2024 -- 0732.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2024 at 22:26:48 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Ponte Vittorio Emanuele II (Bridge) in Rome, Italy at blue hour
There was indeed a (moderate) noise reduction on the water, which I removed in an updated version. It should be better now, shouldn't it? --A. Öztas 16:11, 18 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I'm not sure, but it may have been an effect of the brightening - the RAW file was very underexposed in that area. --A. Öztas 21:57, 21 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Финляндский жд мост.jpg

Voting period ends on 26 Oct 2024 at 16:10:11 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Architectural monument, railway bridge

File:Djebel Ayachi, Eastern High Atlas, Morocco By Mounir NEDDI1.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2024 at 19:28:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
  • ✓ Done Here is an edited version which removes most CAs and also reduces the noise in the sky and the far (unsharp) background. It’s not easy to remove only the CAs because some of them have similar colours as the landscape; and it’s also not easy to get rid of the noise because the sky shows a subtle pattern (maybe from editing, maybe from the Canon sensor, I don’t know); but I hope my version is an improvement. @Cmao20: Would you say the edited version is a decent improvement? @Mounir Neddi: If you like the edited version, you can use it and you can (or I can) just upload over your version. Hope it helps, – Aristeas (talk) 15:29, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Giza Pyramids during "Forever is Now" exhibition.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2024 at 15:13:16 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION

File:Urbino - Duomo di Urbino - Visto da via Puccinotti (1) - 2024-09-23 16-14-34 001.jpg

Voting period ends on 25 Oct 2024 at 13:02:51 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Cathedral of Urbino, Marche, Italy.

Alternative imageː Cathedral of Urbino, facade.

File:Jindřichov - autumn.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2024 at 12:35:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Trees in Jindřichov, Czech Republic

File:The Conjurer, ca. 1502.jpg

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2024 at 10:22:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Follower of Hieronymus Bosch: The Conjurer

File:Château Frontenac, Quebec city, Canada.jpg (delist)

Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2024 at 06:24:02
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Photomontage - Château Frontenac, Quebec city, Canada
  •  Info Fake image. Heavily altered photograph, making it look like a Disney dreamy castle. Look at this 🌘 purple sunset ✨️, is that not extraordinary? I think many people like me have been fooled by this nomination, as nothing indicated the manipulation here nor in the file page, before my misleading support.
This picture has been uploaded on Commons without any mention of the fake background, neither in the file name, nor in the description, nor in the categories, and has certainly been nominated by Ikan Kekek in good faith, at this stage.
But oddly, it is a colorful sunset associated to a photo taken at 14:06, early afternoon, according to exif metada, a few minutes before this picture with similar shadows, this skyline, the same castle, same day at 16:42, and from another angle at 16:29.
The day after my vote, a template has been added saying "Retouched picture - The image was taken with the combination of 3 images at different times of the day". Was a tripod used here? Here is the building just 16 minutes later (same light, and very likely overprocessed photo). And look at this other incredible pink sunset taken same day at 16:30 in the afternoon. Is it real? Does anything indicate "fake", "retouched", "photomontage" or else in the current version? Is the sky similar to this one, taken just one minute before? How many fakes are there like those?
And how far did the cheating go? Following this fake of unreal building by the same author, discovered this year just by chance, nominated for delisting by A.Savin and leading to distrust among many of us, Aristeas requested from Wilfredor "Please check your featured pictures one by one. Are there more of them which were created artificially or were manipulated heavily? If yes, then please list these photos (and only these) here and we can discuss how to proceed with them". Wilfredor answered with a few links showing very minor retouches and wrote "In some photos I removed some dirty dust in the sky, I removed some garbage, nothing that really alters the result in a drastic way." Why has this problematic FP been hidden in January 2024? We could have discussed the case earlier.
It is such an incredible view with vivid colors and extraordinary purple sky, it is no surprise that the image reached the 8th position among the thousand candidates at the Picture Of The Year (2020). But which position the real photo would have reached with no artificial sunset? And was the category appropriate? I don't think so. It is very obvious that if you add a rainbow, a full moon, a fantastic cloud, or anything spectacular in a picture, the wow factor is more likely to fascinate people, especially if your candidate is accepted at FPC. On the original nomination, Poco wrote "the result is great" but I have strong doubts the reviewing people really know which kind of picture exactly they had under the eyes. At least my own vote would have been an explicit {{Oppose}}, and perhaps other people would have discussed before taking another decision. -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:24, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

* Keep The sky is a bit purpleish ok, but the light on the buildings is beautiful. Photography is not only about realism. If the sky seems to be a bit "fantasy", it's not a problem to me. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 07:14, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  •  Info It is not "a bit purpleish", it is totally different from what it was in reality. See the other pictures taken at the same time. And here, I suspect a huge modification, not just a minor local change. Moreover, everything should have been crystal clear from the beginning on the file page and in the file name. This is not "a bit fantasy", in my opinion. It's just completely impossible, once you check everything carefully. Similar case. Also "a bit fantasy"? -- Basile Morin (talk) 07:31, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think the two are similar cases because in that image the added northern lights were a huge (if not main) component of the picture, whereas the sky in this image is not the main component, the autumn view of the castle is. And in this case the modification was not hidden, it was duly declared on the file page as well as the nomination page (albeit a bit late but it still received 10 +support votes even after the declaration). The main contention with this image is if the declared modification was indeed the real modification, or if the sky came from a completely different place. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 23:03, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment I did have the impression this picture was an 'artistic' rather than realistic depiction at the time after reading Wilfredor's reply to Poco a Poco's comments, so I am not too troubled by it. However, it would have been nice if you'd been a bit more open about the manipulations made at the time, Wilfredor. Can you clarify for me how taking three exposures at different times of day produced this kind of effect? I'd like to know, partly out of interest as this technique is new to me. Cmao20 (talk) 11:13, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment +1. This is a very interesting case (to put it neutrally for now). Already during the nomination Daniel Case understood this photo as a “combination of different times of day” and called it “not so much a retouched image as a composite”. But we still do not know exactly if this is correct, or if maybe totally unrelated photos have been combined here. Therefore like Cmao20 I would be eager to learn how exactly this picture has been created. – Aristeas (talk) 14:07, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Hmm, i think i put S that time. Simple, Wilfredor can you upload original somewhere ? If "you havent" i must oppose. Colors are more pastel, if some vibrance added thats fine. Let see first. --Mile (talk) 18:33, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist I recall that these were three separate images: two long-exposure shots of the sky taken at different times to clear the clouds, and another of the castle with a shorter exposure to capture the trees clearly. Unfortunately, I no longer have the raw files or the Photoshop project used to merge the building with the sky. At that time, I didn't think it was necessary to explain the process, nor did I anticipate that such edits might be controversial. I now understand the importance of providing more details. I just got home from work, which is why it took me a while to respond, but I'm fully prepared to clarify any concerns you may have about this or any other image. BTW, In the future, ping me to know what people are talking about me, I always go through FPC but I could miss some discussion. --Wilfredor (talk) 20:31, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thanks for your vote, Wilfredor. The standard page for the delist process does not seem formatted to ping the photographers, contrary to a standard nomination page. There is just a transcluded code supposing to link to the original nomination. According to the light, it looks like the sky has been cut and pasted around the castle. -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:56, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Neutral leaning towards keep; the modification was declared at the time of nomination and did not receive any opposition then, but as Aristeas has pointed out, we don't know if the modification was limited to what was declared only. It comes down to whether or not Wilfredor is telling the truth above, and for the time being I'm choosing to assume good faith and believe them, until someone gives me enough reason not to. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 23:12, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Info 1) First, some modifications have been mentioned during the voting process, after 12 positive votes, not from the beginning as it should have been. Nothing was indicated at the start, and many of us may have missed this part. Thus, the start could have been totally different, and have given another orientation to the debate. As everybody know, it's always more difficult to invert a tendency where there is already a clear consensus. 2) Secondly, even if some reviewers noticed the modification, it is very improbable they were aware of what exactly / how far the photomontage was (because no way to compare). Taking 3 pictures at 18:00, 18:05 and 18:10 is totally different than taking three pictures at 14:00, 17:00 and 19:00. And does the sunset sky even come from the same day?? 3) As long as we don't have the original photos / real pictures under the eyes, it seems extremely difficult for us to figure out what would be the real sky. The closest we can imagine is this sky with burnt clouds apparently taken 2 hours later. The light of the building is different, but the sky may have been similar. 4) It is supposed to be a realistic image, giving faithful representation of the place, under realistic weather conditions. At least the picture competed in such category, and not in Composites and Montages (like this transparent creation for example). The discussion should have been oriented around this dreamy aspect, instead of taking us by surprise, or even misleading us. There are weird elements in the purple sky of this picture taken same day, inside the bell tower -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:16, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment According to the picture (check the road markings) and to google street view it looks like the picture was taken from the middle of the road. To achieve a true combination of 3 separate photos with different lightings the camera would need to be on a tripod (so that all pictures are taken from the exact same place with exact same framing to avoid inconsistencies when assembling) but the tripod would need to stay on the middle of the road and of the driving cars for an extended period which seems difficult/impossible. Also, this picture seems downsized to 2858x2960 pixels (this other photo from the same camera and place has 4 times more resolution : 5929x5304 pixels). The fact that the picture was downsized makes it difficult to zoom in to search for inconsistencies. Could you please upload the full resolution picture Wilfredor and also enlighten us on how you made to keep a tripod on the middle of the road for an extended period? Thank you in advance -- Giles Laurent (talk) 01:14, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    Also, maybe it's just a wrong impression of mine but when looking at the picture at thumbnail size it looks like to me that the sky is brighter all around the castle as if some editing happened there (but maybe it's just an exposure brush). Is it me or was that area edited? Thank you in advance -- Giles Laurent (talk) 01:27, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    There is a small island where a tripod can be placed in the middle of the street. The street was lightly trafficked by vehicles and, in fact, there were very few people. Unfortunately, I do not have the RAW files of this photograph, as four years ago I did not give sufficient importance to backing up these files. However, in recent months I have started to do so, as this facilitates the verification and execution of future retouching. Wilfredor (talk) 02:15, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    I saw the small island on street view but when you look at the markings on the road we can see that you were on the middle of the crosswalk and not on the small island. The point of view from the small island would be to have the sidewalk from the left of your picture in front of you and not the road. Also if you would have been on the small island this tree would cover even more the building (look at the tree on the left) as it does from this streeview perspective closer to the island but not yet on it which is not the case in this photo (look at the tree on the left) and indicates that you were not on the small island.
    Even if you don't have the original raw, maybe you have the jpg of the 3 unedited shots that you used to assemble? Or if that's all you have can you show us the three edited shots that you assembled so that we can better understand the editing process? -- Giles Laurent (talk) 09:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
+1 with Giles about the impression of brightness around the castle, at thumbnail size, as if the sun(set) was behind. Whereas the sun is supposed to be on the left, according to the shadows. Does this sky come from a totally different picture? Also agree that the drastically downsized resolution makes the search for inconsistencies more difficult. Thanks for your help. -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:50, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The Nikon D7200 has a maximum image resolution of 6000 x 4000 pixels. The image you are trying to compare has a resolution of 5929 x 5304 pixels, which exceeds the capability that this camera can generate on its own. This leads me to believe that it is a composite photo made from several images. I do not recall having downsized it; perhaps I cut . Additionally, there are details that are really difficult to remember, as this photo was taken four years ago and I typically capture thousands of images each year. Remembering a specific detail is not easy, but it is evident that such a resolution is not possible with the Nikon D7200 without combining multiple images Wilfredor (talk) 02:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Both this picture and this picture have been taken from the same distance of the castle. And this picture was even shot at 32mm which is a bigger zoom than the 26 mm used on this picture (so the 32mm picture should have building windows appearing bigger than in the 26mm shot). When you zoom in on both pictures at full size you can clearly see that the one on the left was downsized because everything is way smaller (compare the windows for example) when in reality the windows should have been bigger on the left than on the right because a bigger zoom was used on the image on the left. Even if this picture is a panorama, stitching images together to create a panorama won't give more resolution to each window on the building. Also this picture is much sharper than the other one, which is something that always happens when a picture is downsized. So it looks like to me that this picture is very likely downsized -- Giles Laurent (talk) 12:59, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist , I guess, per creator's wishes, but I still don't really understand how this picture was made or to what extent it is manipulated/artificial. Giles Laurent's questions make me even more confused. If this picture had been presented as an artistic photomontage in the first place I'd still have voted for it, btw. But I'm not sure I can trust it anymore. Cmao20 (talk) 01:53, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    The skies were combined into multiple layers using Photoshop, adjusting the transparency percentage of each to achieve a harmonious fusion. Subsequently, this composition was integrated with the photograph of the castle and the clouds. I mention this not with the intention of changing your opinion, but simply to provide a detailed explanation. I think that if you look for things there will always be theories of what could have been, what was not and supposedly incongruous things, and as Mile said, in the absence of a RAW that proves it, my word will not convince, so I suggest making a list of this and any image of mine that does not have a supporting RAW. I myself am not voluntarily nominating any more Featured Pictures. I sincerely feel that this process is demeaning. Wilfredor (talk) 02:43, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
If the sun is setting on the left, should not the sky be brighter on the left too, like in this picture? -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:38, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist If the picture had been classified as a photomontage from the beginning, and all the steps had been clearly documented, this de-listing would never have happened. The documentation would have also included the images from which the composite was created. I am sorry Wilfredor, but the undisclosed manipulations discovered by other users have damaged your good reputation. In my opinion, you are an outstanding photographer who does not need to gain kudos with undocumented manipulations. We have to be honest with each other in this forum, anything else leads to additional poisoning, of which we have already had far too much here. Honesty is the best policy. Best, -- Radomianin (talk) 07:05, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes, I know. My "+1" relates to Radomianin's comment. I am confused what to vote. This is a nice picture, but the undisclosed manipulations bring bad feelings. Yann (talk) 16:42, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist Now i read about "Caracas building", i was mislead there too. Now, how to trust your future nomines, without original...--Mile (talk) 07:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist Best solution. --Thi (talk) 09:26, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist as viewers were deceived in FPC and POTY. It ran out of control, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 19:32, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reluctant  Delist not because it shouldn't be a FP -- I think it should -- but because process is important. Just be as clear as you can with the {{Retouched}} template so as not to leave any lingering questions and nominate with that in place. If you forget to do so, it's important to ping everything who supported up to that point. IMO this should still be a FP, but it should undergo a new nomination once full information is provided on the file page. — Rhododendrites talk |  16:24, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Comment Thanks, everyone, for the reviews and various opinions. For the record, the Caracas building has been renominated last January, but didn't pass. About composite and montage pictures in general (not especially this one), perhaps we can suggest to 1) carefully choose the relevant galleries, 2) be in possession of the original photos (at least the JPG versions) so as to be able to talk transparently about the presented works, 3) maintain a standard resolution (no downsized pictures for example) in line with the present time, displaying enough pixels so as to compete with the very best images of the same kind. Now my personal opinion about this castle with colorful trees is that the original photo should have been able to be promoted with no major modification (because we can see the light is special somewhere). But perhaps the clouds were burnt with blown highlights at the beginning, something impossible to fix afterwards. In that case that would have been a technical issue (all photographers ever met this situation). But we learn from past errors, and we can improve by practicing. -- Basile Morin (talk) 23:38, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Delist . Commons deserves better --A.Savin 17:48, 19 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

File:Jews Protest in Solidarity with Palestine -1 (52082106404).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2024 at 04:30:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

SHORT DESCRIPTION
Confirmed results:
Result: 8 support, 5 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:12, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 24 Oct 2024 at 03:52:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Faisal Mosque in the capital city of Pakistan, in 2014
This is a photo of a monument in Pakistan identified as the
ICT-5

Alternative evening view

Faisal Mosque with the majestic Margalla Hills in the backdrop

Confirmed results:
Result: 1 support, 3 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:15, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 23 Oct 2024 at 22:58:30 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

The entrance of the former medical facility in the village of Čanište
Confirmed results:
Result: 9 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /-- Radomianin (talk) 05:19, 24 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
This image will be added to the FP gallery: Objects/Architectural elements#Doors


Timetable (day 5 after nomination)

Sat 19 Oct → Thu 24 Oct
Sun 20 Oct → Fri 25 Oct
Mon 21 Oct → Sat 26 Oct
Tue 22 Oct → Sun 27 Oct
Wed 23 Oct → Mon 28 Oct
Thu 24 Oct → Tue 29 Oct

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

Tue 15 Oct → Thu 24 Oct
Wed 16 Oct → Fri 25 Oct
Thu 17 Oct → Sat 26 Oct
Fri 18 Oct → Sun 27 Oct
Sat 19 Oct → Mon 28 Oct
Sun 20 Oct → Tue 29 Oct
Mon 21 Oct → Wed 30 Oct
Tue 22 Oct → Thu 31 Oct
Wed 23 Oct → Fri 01 Nov
Thu 24 Oct → Sat 02 Nov

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 the 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. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
    • 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/October 2024), 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/October 2024.
  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 photography, 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/October 2024), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Retrieved from "https://commons.wikimedia.org/w/index.php?title=Commons:Featured_picture_candidates&oldid=884719385"