Commons:Featured picture candidates

Other featured candidates:

Media 

Skip to current candidates

Featured picture candidates Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election.

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

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

Table of contents

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

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

Featured picture candidates

File:Luzern asv2022-10 Gotthardgebäude img03.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2023 at 23:23:01 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Luzern asv2022-10 Gotthardgebäude img03.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Luzern asv2022-10 Gotthardgebäude img03.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors#Switzerland
•  Info Representative conference hall of the former Gotthard Railway headquarters building in Lucerne, which is now used by a branch of the Federal Supreme Court of Switzerland. All by me, --A.Savin 23:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --A.Savin 23:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Cetatea medievală Deva, în lumina răsăritului.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2023 at 19:45:35 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Cetatea medievală Deva, în lumina răsăritului.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Cetatea medievală Deva, în lumina răsăritului.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Romania
•  Info Deva, a Romanian medieval fortress, at sunrise. It is located in the city of Deva, Hunedoara County, on top of a volcanic hill. The fortress is located atop a volcano in the Poiana Ruscă Mountain Range within the Western Romanian Carpathian Mountains. Created and uploaded by Neighbor's goat - nominated by ★ -- ★ 19:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- ★ 19:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Several pictures uploaded by this photographer show white balances issues (examples 1 or 2) and although it's a sunset, I'm not certain the colors here are faithful -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:38, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Wooden pig merry-go-round in Brastad 3.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2023 at 13:34:07 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Wooden pig merry-go-round in Brastad 3.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Wooden pig merry-go-round in Brastad 3.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Toys
•  Info I have been photographing playgrounds for a while, and this crazy-looking pig has haunted me ever since. I hope the kids aren't too traumatized by it. This farm-themed playground was built in 2018, based on ideas and designs made by the fifth-graders of the local Stångenäs school; many of them live on farms in the area. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 13:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Cart (talk) 13:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support horror-film material. Tomer T (talk) 14:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ..."there is a distinct lack of deranged wooden pigs on FPC..." and this nomination is a good way to mitigate the fact --Kritzolina (talk) 14:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support OK perhaps not quite as horrible as this pig made of tires, but still quite good. --A.Savin 23:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Gibson's Albatross 0A2A8124.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2023 at 10:20:46 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Gibson's Albatross 0A2A8124.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gibson's Albatross 0A2A8124.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Diomedeidae (Albatross)
•  Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 10:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose The bird is great, but the waves didn't cooperate. The unfocused swell down right ruins the composition for me. Too bad. --Cart (talk) 10:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support It's a nice shot in itself but the tip of the wing lying between swells makes it even more incredible in my view, and shows the bird was flying very low - Benh (talk) 17:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Ermell (talk) 20:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 06:07, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Острів Байда в ранішньому тумані.jpg

Voting period ends on 20 Dec 2023 at 10:17:00 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Острів Байда в ранішньому тумані.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Острів Байда в ранішньому тумані.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Ukraine
•  Info created & uploaded by Yedmitry - nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 10:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Tomer T (talk) 10:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Great scene, and the bird couldn't have been better placed. --Cart (talk) 10:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Given the historical significance of the location, the fog creates a great, meaningful atmosphere. Thanks for the nomination, Tomer T! Spotted it just before while sorting the recently promoted QIs. -- Radomianin (talk) 11:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 22:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support The castle is on the island, right? I can't see it, but I like what I do see. One problem: Both links in the English-language description are red. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:48, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

File:The Cheat LCCN2010649713-restored.jpg

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2023 at 22:26:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:The Cheat LCCN2010649713-restored.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Cheat LCCN2010649713-restored.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Printed#Posters and advertisements
•  Info created by Paramount Pictures - uploaded by Fæ - restored/nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 22:26, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ezarateesteban 22:26, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very good condition and detailed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan Kekek. Great technical quality and educational value. It's nice that we will have featured material of Pola Negri. I even visited once her Polish birthplace Lipno. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:05, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Irresistible old drama style. --Cart (talk) 09:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 10:27, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:48, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Peulle (talk) 13:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Sepia común (Sepia officinalis), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2021-09-07, DD 04.jpg

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

Featured picture candidates/File:Sepia común (Sepia officinalis), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2021-09-07, DD 04.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sepia común (Sepia officinalis), Parque natural de la Arrábida, Portugal, 2021-09-07, DD 04.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals#Class_:_Cephalopoda
•  Info Common cuttlefish (Sepia officinalis), Arrábida National Park, Portugal. The common cuttlefish is one of the largest and best-known cuttlefish species. They are a migratory species that spend the summer and spring inshore for spawning and then move to depths of 100 to 200m during autumn and winter. They only have a lifespan of 1–2 years and have many predators including sharks, dolphins, seals, fish, and cephalopods which includes other cuttlefish. During the day, most cuttlefish can be found buried below the substrate and fairly inactive. At night however, they are actively searching for prey and can ambush them from under the substrate. Cuttlefish are carnivorous and eat a variety of organisms including crustaceans (crabs and shrimp), small fish, molluscs (clams and snails), and sometimes other cuttlefish. Poco a poco (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:22, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support The denoising of the background could have gone a bit closer to the cuttlefish, but it's still a great shot. --Cart (talk) 22:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

• Good point, Cart,  Done Poco a poco (talk) 07:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support ★ 23:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Maybe common, but still pretty, and big enough to show a good deal of detail. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Coloring and DoF gives it the impression of a painting at first glance - beautiful beyond the "usual" good animal pictures' beauty --Kritzolina (talk) 07:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very fascinating species. At first sight, I actually felt a bit reminded of the Mutated Guild Navigator from the 1984 movie version of Dune. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• My thoughts exactly, Radomianin! I just didn't know if anyone here would know that old classic film. :-D --Cart (talk) 10:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• Well, that makes two of us, but I think there are other regulars out there who know this classic :) -- Radomianin (talk) 11:22, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --Yann (talk) 10:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Additional information: This animal shows the typical threatening gesture --Llez (talk) 12:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Ermell (talk) 13:17, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 15:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Agree about a very fascinating animal, and particularly in this photograph (compared to other views of the same species on Google that seem more ordinary). Here the shape really evokes a sci-fi monster, with fantasy-like tentacles. I also appreciate the abyssal aspect of the background, the natural light and the appealing angle -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:21, 12 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 06:09, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Black and white vignetting.jpg

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2023 at 19:18:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Black and white vignetting.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Black and white vignetting.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Vignetting
•  Info Black and white vignetting applied to a picture of Doce River, Colatina, Espírito Santo, Brazil. Taken from Florentino Avidos Bridge. Created, uploaded and nominated by ★ -- ★ 19:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support My first own image nominated by myself. I hope you like this dramatic work! ;) -- ★ 19:18, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Sorry, vignetting is not my favourite artisitic treatment. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak oppose There is drama all right, and a much better first try than I expected, so good on you for taking this step in photography. But it is a bit murky and parts of the river landscape could have been edited better (as in selective editing, not just a filter). You need stronger features in the landscape and not all dark land when you go for B&W. --Cart (talk) 09:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Alternative

•  Info @Charlesjsharp: Version without vignetting added for comparison. ★ 23:15, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per my comment above. --Cart (talk) 09:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination Thanks for the reviews. I tried to do my best! ★ 19:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Camera zoom burst on a Microsoft computer keyboard in Tuntorp 8.jpg

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2023 at 18:12:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Camera zoom burst on a Microsoft computer keyboard in Tuntorp 8.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Camera zoom burst on a Microsoft computer keyboard in Tuntorp 8.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Styles and Techniques#Zoom bursts
•  Info One photo, no double exposure. Made during one zooming with the lens under weak light. Technique with tiny pauses at the beginning and end, resembling this. All by me, -- Cart (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Cart (talk) 18:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Wow! ★ 18:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very impressive, I also love some of the other images you uploaded! --Kritzolina (talk) 19:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very nice --XRay 💬 19:43, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support What a technique! You are such an artist! --Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 20:15, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Intressant fotografisk teknik från det sätt du förklarade. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:54, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Strong candidate! Thanks for the nomination. -- Radomianin (talk) 23:00, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Someone may prove me wrong, but I feel like there's no viable criticism of this abstract composition. The longer I look at it, the better it gets! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

intressant

• I got to hand it to you, that was the most creative vote comment I've seen in a long time. :-D --Cart (talk) 21:57, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Guaita Fortress and San Marino (2023).jpg

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2023 at 16:43:59 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Guaita Fortress and San Marino (2023).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Guaita Fortress and San Marino (2023).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#San_Marino
•  Info The Guaita fortress is the oldest of the three towers constructed on Monte Titano (San Marino), and the most famous. It was built in the 11th century and served as a strategic watchtower and briefly as a prison. Situated on the top of the Città di San Marino, it's a UNESCO World Heritage Site since 2008.
•  Info To create this photo I was inspired by [Max Ryazanov (2013)] and [Diego Delso (2022)]. Created, uploaded and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 16:43, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 19:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Interesting composition and quite high level of detail. I would like some fog around the castle, but the weather can not be always perfect. Anyway, well done for the great shot.--Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 20:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I guess I'm the first person to notice that the background is severely posterized. I think that repairing that would be a major undertaking. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:43, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

  Hi, for the background I used the haze removal function to make the architectural buildings stand out in the background. Maybe I exaggerated with the values, but that was my intent. Reworking the image is possible but tiring, because it is made up of 9 images to stitch... I have no idea how many hours it will take, but today I have time to dedicate to the project. For Ikan: What I need to know is whether, in your opinion, the posterization is greater for the part relating to the sky or the panorama of the territory. Thank you... Terragio67 (talk) 05:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• The sky and further background is consistently bad, whereas the middleground is sometimes equally bad and sometimes not as bad. You don't have to fix it on my account if you like the photo the way it is; I just won't support it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Pink colour cast and slightly oversharpened. Low quality overall - Benh (talk) 08:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Thank you all. I am unable to make corrections to the image now, as there are multiple issues. I shook too vigorously on the background, perhaps there is too much of a pink tone, and this could be due to a white balance error. They seem like small things, but all together they are not at all. I preferred to create an alternative image which in my opinion seems very promising, and probably far better than the previous one. @★ , @Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης , @Ikan Kekek , @Benh , please, I will be happy to know your opinion about the next one. --Terragio67 (talk) 20:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Alternative version

•  Info The Guaita fortress is the oldest of the three towers constructed on Monte Titano (San Marino), and the most famous. It was built in the 11th century and served as a strategic watchtower on the City of San Marino and briefly as a prison. Created, uploaded and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 20:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 20:20, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment This lacks the posterization and most of the noise in the other photo, but it also lacks the light, color and contrast that makes the other photo special. This is so drab by comparison, and like the other one, it's quite hazy in the distance. Don't get me wrong: this is a good photo. But I'm having trouble thinking of it as a feature in this context. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:36, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:RF 3006 Lorde@Arena Krists Luhaers-5 (35769377251).jpg

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2023 at 14:13:44 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:RF 3006 Lorde@Arena Krists Luhaers-5 (35769377251).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:RF 3006 Lorde@Arena Krists Luhaers-5 (35769377251).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
•  Info Lorde at the Roskilde Festival 2017. Created by Krists Luhaers - uploaded by Tm - nominated by ★ -- ★ 14:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Her expressive pose matches the hazy atmosphere in the background. -- ★ 14:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Good, but I would clone out the thing at the bottom right, or crop the picture. Yann (talk) 17:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  The thing at the bottom doesn’t bother me. ★ 20:01, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Good mood, but not "clean" enough at the bottom. Besides the "thing" Yann mentioned, that glimpse of her thigh competes (as any bright object near a border will) with her face, and is distracting. Cropping the photo will not work either as that would make the compo unbalanced. --Cart (talk) 09:26, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Nice shot. The mic at the bottom right could be cloned out but it's a minor flaw. --Selbymay (talk) 12:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Gray-breasted Partridge 0A2A3088.jpg

Voting period ends on 19 Dec 2023 at 10:46:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Gray-breasted Partridge 0A2A3088.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Gray-breasted Partridge 0A2A3088.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Phasianidae_(Grouse,_Partridges,_Peafowl,_Pheasants,_Quail,_Turkeys)
•  Info created & uploaded by JJ Harrison – nominated by Ivar (talk) 10:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ivar (talk) 10:46, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 14:30, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Wilfredor (talk) 22:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I think you need to explain Ivar how special this shot is. The image would fail if it was an easy-to-capture bird. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:07, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Yes, if it were an ordinary chicken or something, but the head is pretty sharp, the feather patterns are pretty clear, we see detail on the feet, and it's a nice composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:46, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Great composition and very nice colour combination. The mentioned difficulty in capturing the bird adds value to the image. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:58, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Perhaps a tad underexposed, otherwise consistent level of detail, and of course more valuable if the animal is rare -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:03, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Cart (talk) 09:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:23, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Ermell (talk) 21:16, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Praying bhikkhus inside Wat Mai Suwannaphumaham in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2023 at 22:47:21 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Praying bhikkhus inside Wat Mai Suwannaphumaham in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Praying bhikkhus inside Wat Mai Suwannaphumaham in Luang Prabang Laos.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Laos
•  Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 22:47, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Wow! ★ 14:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 17:33, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:45, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 19:55, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Devotional and splendid; impressive variety of Buddha statues; good quality in terms of composition and quality. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:53, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per others, and also, it's great that you're showing us a moment in the life of Buddhist monks and adding to the number of Buddhist temple interiors that are featured. We've featured loads of church interiors and will continue to do so, we have a decent though still hardly overwhelming number of mosque interiors, but we could really use more excellent Buddhist and Hindu temple interiors. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Wonderful, and nice alignment of the monks - Benh (talk) 08:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I like how the bhikkhus sort of "spill out" on the floor from the big Buddha, forming a visual triangle and creating a sense of unity. Would also work in the 'People#Traditions' gallery. --Cart (talk) 09:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 21:13, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:SAAB Linköping - Nordiska museet - NMAx.0002144 (restored).jpg

Voting period ends on 18 Dec 2023 at 17:23:25 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:SAAB Linköping - Nordiska museet - NMAx.0002144 (restored).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:SAAB Linköping - Nordiska museet - NMAx.0002144 (restored).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1950-1959
•  Info The SAAB factory in Linköping (Sweden) with some of the first Saab 35 Draken under production in 1957. The Saab 35 Draken was the first Western European-built combat aircraft with true supersonic capability to enter service and the first fully supersonic aircraft to be deployed in Western Europe. It was also one of the first Western-European-built aircraft to exceed Mach 2 in level flight, reaching it on 14 January 1960. During the Cold War large amounts of money were spent on the Swedish Air Force and domestic aircraft production. In 1957 Sweden had the world's fourth most powerful air force, with about 1,000 modern planes in front-line service.
• Created by K.W. Gullers - uploaded by Alicia Fagerving (WMSE) (in cooperation with Nordiska Museet) - restored and nominated by -- ArildV (talk) 17:23, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- ArildV (talk) 17:23, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral IMO the photo was taken under unfavorable lighting conditions. The object at the bottom is also disturbing. --XRay 💬 19:29, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose An interesting image, no doubt, but the composition is poor (disturbing object at the bottom, tip of the rod on the nose of the plane cut off, lots of irrelevant ceiling included) and the lighting/white balance is less than ideal. Maybe a Valued Image candidate? BigDom (talk) 20:56, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose per others, and it's also not very sharp, with noise, but please do nominate at VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Many issues in the photo could be fixed with today's programs, but I think you should only go so far with restorations. I like the original photo to be preserved as much as possible for a historic FP. Making too wild edits and you end up with an image that is more "based on a photo by" than a restoration. (Like when filmmakers make movies "based on a novel by Xxx..." and re-warp old classic stories to fit the modern narrative.) Also the cut nose rod is really bugging me. --Cart (talk) 09:41, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Sunset in Pythagoreio.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2023 at 23:02:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Sunset in Pythagoreio.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File: Sunset in Pythagoreio.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Sun
•  Info created, uploaded and nominated by Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης -- Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 23:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful, great light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:06, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very peaceful atmosphere, and I agree beautiful light! --Kritzolina (talk) 10:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:09, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Too much foreground. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for your comment. I have another edition of

  the picture, but the quality is lower, due to editing. I don't know if I can do something for that.Your comments are always welcome. Best regards, Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 19:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support ★ 20:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks for the new version, the foreground doesn't bother me. Nice light and good technical quality. It's funny that this view looks very familiar to me - it's been nine years since I visited Pythagoreio :) -- Radomianin (talk) 22:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose a bit boring of a landscape and too busy for a minimalistic picture. - Benh (talk) 08:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:31, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good combination of sea and terrain. --Thi (talk) 17:50, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 06:12, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Marina Izola.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2023 at 20:55:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Marina Izola.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Marina Izola.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Water transport
•  Info Marina Izola. My photo. --Mile (talk) 20:55, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Mile (talk) 20:55, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support High quality and interesting composition -- Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 14:07, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 17:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Nice view --XRay 💬 19:35, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment I like it but why not have the same amount of negative space at both sides? IMO it would look better. BigDom (talk) 20:59, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

• BigDom good point, i will see what i can do. --Mile (talk) 20:02, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  Please don't do anythng about it - the non-symmetry in certain aspects is one of the really good things about this image. Kritzolina (talk) 07:44, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• BigDom, Kritzolina i added 150 px on each side, to get some breath, but would not go more, since i would loose diagonal strike. --Mile (talk) 17:04, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --El Grafo (talk) 11:04, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I understand the symmetry, but don't like the cropped boats. Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Charles. ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 15:28, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 17:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 20:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Very good diagonal composition that gives the image a strong dynamic, the moving boat is the cherry on the cake. -- Radomianin (

talk) 22:41, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support per Radomianin --Kritzolina (talk) 07:45, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Fernsicht vom Herzogenhorn.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2023 at 16:35:31 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Fernsicht vom Herzogenhorn.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Fernsicht vom Herzogenhorn.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Germany#Baden-Württemberg
•  Info Outstanding far view (239 km) from the Herzogenhorn in the Black Forrest to the Alps. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 16:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Milseburg (talk) 16:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Beautiful light, valuable. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:55, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:25, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --imehling (talk) 16:14, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:49, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support In addition to the great view, there are interesting things to explore, such as the obvious steam from a power plant or the wind turbine. Wonderful lighting. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:38, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 23:03, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose no wow and only the foreground is lit. - Benh (talk) 08:53, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:19, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Minnie Tittell Brune as the Duke of Reichstadt in Edmond Rostand's play L'Aiglon - Talma & Co.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2023 at 15:48:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Minnie Tittell Brune as the Duke of Reichstadt in Edmond Rostand's play L'Aiglon - Talma & Co.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Minnie Tittell Brune as the Duke of Reichstadt in Edmond Rostand's play L'Aiglon - Talma & Co.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1900-1909
•  Info created by Talma & Co. - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 15:48, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 15:57, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Cayambe (talk) 16:44, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Good one. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:56, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ----Don (talk) 22:40, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 20:35, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
• @Yann, Cayambe, Ikan Kekek, WPPilot, and ArionStar: Just a heads up that, while glancing at the thumbnailed version, I noticed a big halo around her head. That's probably contemporary image editing (photoshopping is nothing new), but it's very, very visible at smaller scales, so I spent a little time fixing it up. I'd say it's a clear change for the better, but it is a change. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:44, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Thank you for removing the halo and enhancing this expressive portrait. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:31, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support So elegant. --Cart (talk) 09:56, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:39, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Anne-Marie-4250.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2023 at 13:18:26 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Anne-Marie-4250.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Anne-Marie-4250.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/People#Musicians and singers performing
•  Info Singer Anne-Marie at the SWR3 New Pop Festival 2017. Created and uploaded by Harald Krichel - nominated by ★ -- ★/Yann 13:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- ★ 13:18, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Nice portrait. --Yann (talk) 13:39, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Yann. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 20:58, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Isn't croped version better solution ? --Mile (talk) 21:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

  No. ★ 21:55, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose we have many great shots of stage performances in our gallery already. In comparison, this falls short. Photographically speaking, this is fine and the focus is right on the close eye. But there is no energy in this: her face is flat and without expression. Fine for QI and maybe VI, but no WOW for FP. --El Grafo (talk) 11:13, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination Grafo has a point. ★ 14:09, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

• Why did you withdraw? It has 3 supports and one oppose, and there is no indication that it won't succeed. Yann (talk) 17:37, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  Her facial expression is dull. ★ 18:48, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

• Would you mind if I take over this nomination? Yann (talk) 19:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  Of course not! Just do it! ★ 19:19, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

• OK, thanks. I removed your withdrawal. Let's see what others think. Yann (talk) 19:36, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Personally, I like the portrait and think the technical quality is very good. Thanks for the nomination. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:17, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:29, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Mile (talk) 17:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Harry Houdini jumps from Harvard Bridge, Boston, Massachusetts, 1908 - John H. Thurston, stereopticons LCCN2015650990 - restoration.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2023 at 13:12:09 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Harry Houdini jumps from Harvard Bridge, Boston, Massachusetts, 1908 - John H. Thurston, stereopticons LCCN2015650990 - restoration.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Harry Houdini jumps from Harvard Bridge, Boston, Massachusetts, 1908 - John H. Thurston, stereopticons LCCN2015650990 - restoration.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical#1900-1909
•  Info Harry Houdini before he jumped off the Harvard Bridge in Boston in 1908. Created by Thurston, John H. (John Henry) - uploaded by TommasoRmndn - nominated by ★ -- ★ 13:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support 🎶 Catch me or I go, Houdini 🎵 -- ★ 13:12, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

File renaming

Comment The file name looks odd. I assume it's meant to imply that this is an image done 'after'/(derived from) the original photo, so probably just bad choice of language. But since he is not even wet, the photo is probably taken before he jumped off the bridge, and the title looks misleading. --Cart (talk) 16:19, 8 December 2023 (UTC) Cart I appreciate your input on Arion's work. Given that Arion is still mastering English, it might be beneficial to not only comment but also suggest specific corrections. This could help clarify your point and assist Arion in understanding and improving --Wilfredor (talk) 16:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC) From what I can see, it wasn't Arion who named the file. Arion is simply the nominator. But if you'd like a name suggestion, I would say that "Houdini jumps from Harvard Bridge, Boston, Massachusetts) - John H. Thurston, stereopticons LCCN2015650990 - restoration" could be a good name. It's similar to how other restored photos here at FPC are named. If Arion likes, I could help rename and move everything to a new name (even during the nom) to make sure no links are broken and the nom can continue smoothly. Just tell me what you want to call it, and I'll fix it. --Cart (talk) 16:18, 9 December 2023 (UTC) I'm ok with the renaming. ★ 16:41, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

•  I withdraw my nomination Voters didn't like this one. ★ 19:20, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Question Huh? You withdrew too early! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

  Two first days without votes…

  If you like it, you can take the nomination instead of me. ★ 10:51, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• I was going easy on my hands in advance of a concert, and I also think people were waiting for the issues about the filename to be resolved (another factor for me). Is anyone else interested in this file? I think it's quite an interesting historical photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:24, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• But you know what? After looking at it again, I think it needs digital restoration, so I've decided not to take on the nomination. Let it be withdrawn. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 19:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

  You have no nominated pictures, so I think there is no problem… ★ 21:47, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Painted door (Photographer). Funchal, Madeira.jpg

Voting period ends on 17 Dec 2023 at 08:35:23 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Painted door (Photographer). Funchal, Madeira.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Painted door (Photographer). Funchal, Madeira.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
•  Info created by Ввласенко - uploaded by Ввласенко - nominated by Ввласенко -- Ввласенко (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment I'm not sure if it's FP, but it is possible he's one of us.-- Ввласенко (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment As noted on a previous nomination, please identify the authors. The plaque on the left of the door has their names: Renato Barros and Lígia Gonçalves [1] --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:27, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Done Sorry and thank you! -- Ввласенко (talk) 10:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 16:08, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose All the peeling paint is distracting and unpleasant to me, and I don't think it really works for the composition, because I want the composition on the door to be the main subject. That's not a criticism of the photography, as you probably couldn't have done better with what you had to work with. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:58, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too many competing elements in the photo, and even if the card with the info is good for information, having it in the photo is like including a plaque on the wall next to a painting in a museum. --Cart (talk) 10:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Let me note that all the peeling paint is part of the artists’ intention. It’s not for nothing that they depicted craquelures on the door leaf itself. That is why the door frame and even part of the walls should be included in the composition.-- Ввласенко (talk) 12:59, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Замок Золочів12.jpg

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2023 at 23:08:39 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Замок Золочів12.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Замок Золочів12.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications#Ukraine
•  Info created by Oprysnyk - uploaded by Oprysnyk - nominated by Ahonc -- Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk) 23:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Anatoliy 🇺🇦 (talk) 23:08, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Info Gallery link refined: …/Castles and fortifications#Ukraine -- Radomianin (talk) 10:57, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Info (Un)symetry is killing me. That building...almost had vertigo. --Mile (talk) 13:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

File:013 Alpha male chimpanzee at Kibale forest National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2023 at 16:22:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:013 Alpha male chimpanzee at Kibale forest National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:013 Alpha male chimpanzee at Kibale forest National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Hominidae (Great Apes)
•  Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:22, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:48, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Wilfredor (talk) 00:38, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 08:10, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:04, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support He looks so human with his relaxed expression and crossed arms. Nice capture, thanks for the nomination. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 11:48, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Giles Laurent Is this 700 $ shot ? Eyes are bothering a bit. Could be more black fur. --Mile (talk) 13:19, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 16:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Milseburg (talk) 16:41, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Don (talk) 22:42, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Karelj (talk) 13:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 15:59, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 14:16, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support :-) --XRay 💬 19:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --BigDom (talk) 21:06, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ~Moheen ^{(keep talking)} 15:29, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:51, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per others, and also because we all know how rare chimpanzees are in the wild, unfortunately. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:00, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Cart (talk) 10:02, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:10, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Sanderling Westkapelle 02.jpg

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2023 at 15:56:33 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Sanderling Westkapelle 02.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Sanderling Westkapelle 02.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Charadriiformes#Genus_:_Calidris
•  Info created by Stephan Sprinz - uploaded by Stephan Sprinz - nominated by Stephan Sprinz -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 15:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Stephan Sprinz (talk) 15:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 15:58, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Harlock81 (talk) 22:15, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:49, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:04, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 16:16, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 16:17, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Don (talk) 22:43, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Gyrostat (talk) 15:33, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 14:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good composition --XRay 💬 19:38, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per XRay -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:12, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Question Blue, yellow and orange hot pixels on the legs and feet? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:01, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

  I believe these are reflections on small foam bubbles. You can see that better on another image of the same bird: File:Sanderling Westkapelle 01.jpg. However, I could clean up the image if the bubbles are too distracting. --Stephan Sprinz (talk) 08:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Thanks for your explanations about the foam bubbles, Stephan. Excellent shot, you made the most of the limited lighting conditions. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:32, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Cart (talk) 10:04, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Llez (talk) 12:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Water reflection of sunset with gray and orange clouds and boats moored to the bank in Pakse Laos.jpg, featured

Voting period ends on 16 Dec 2023 at 01:06:03 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Water reflection of sunset with gray and orange clouds and boats moored to the bank in Pakse Laos.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Water reflection of sunset with gray and orange clouds and boats moored to the bank in Pakse Laos.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Reflections
•  Info created - uploaded - nominated by Basile Morin -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:06, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Another beautiful one. That area is so picturesque, but I think we need more than that for an FP, and here we have not only beauty but also a harmonious composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:01, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Ikan. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:48, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 13:55, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 16:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 19:38, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Nice sky :) - Benh (talk) 21:45, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 22:50, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Wilfredor (talk) 23:20, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support A very nice scene with an appealing atmosphere. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:48, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 16:14, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support The sky is most attractive. --Milseburg (talk) 16:47, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Nice mood --XRay 💬 19:40, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Terragio67 (talk) 17:52, 10 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Despite some unsharpness, esüecially in the lower left corner --Llez (talk) 12:37, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:15, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Poco a poco (talk) 18:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Unconfirmed results: (info)
Result: 17 support, 0 oppose, 0 neutral → featured. /FPCBot (talk) 05:01, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Сончеви зраци над Тиквеш.jpg

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2023 at 23:05:52 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Сончеви зраци над Тиквеш.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Сончеви зраци над Тиквеш.jpg

13

413

5975

3350

6000

4000

Crop suggestion for minimalism. --Cart (talk) 11:34, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena#Crepuscular rays
•  Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment A stunning example of crepuscular rays, but I'm wondering if the landscape below and the small cloud above aren't holding this photo back. True, they give you scale, but perhaps a more minimalist approach might be better? Note added. --Cart (talk) 11:36, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks for the suggestion. I've uploaded and nominated the cropped version as an alternative.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose This version is not so compelling. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The alternative is much better. --Cart (talk) 10:42, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Alternative

•  Info This is a more minimalist alternative version as per Cart's suggestion above.--Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:06, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Clean and good compo and the photo really burns into your retina. (There are a few twigs and stuff left at the bottom that could be cloned out.) Thanks for this 'Alt'. --Cart (talk) 09:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 10:35, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I didn't expect the crop to make so much of a difference, but this is a really compelling photo. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 10:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 10:52, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:28, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Coulson Aviation (N134CG) Lockheed EC-130Q Hercules departing HMAS Albatross.jpg, not featured

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2023 at 23:04:12 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Coulson Aviation (N134CG) Lockheed EC-130Q Hercules departing HMAS Albatross.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Coulson Aviation (N134CG) Lockheed EC-130Q Hercules departing HMAS Albatross.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Others
•  Info created by Bidgee - uploaded by User:Bidgee - nominated by GMH Melbourne -- GMH Melbourne (talk) 23:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Significant image as the aircraft has since crashed in a firefighting mission –– GMH Melbourne (talk) 23:04, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment There are at least 2 dust spots on the left side, above the plane. Also, the point about it being a significant image seems more relevant to COM:VIC. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:03, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose No wow for FP – and although I understand its significance, it's not evident in the photo unless you know its history. As Ikan said, this image would be better for COM:VIC instead. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:49, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose I'm sorry, but I don't think this is an FP. However, you can nominate this picture as a VI. - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 16:13, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 1 support, 2 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:19, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

File:OCSD Duke 6 Bell UH 1H N186SD by Don Ramey Logan.jpg

Voting period ends on 15 Dec 2023 at 07:25:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:OCSD Duke 6 Bell UH 1H N186SD by Don Ramey Logan.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:OCSD Duke 6 Bell UH 1H N186SD by Don Ramey Logan.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air_transport#Helicopters
•  Info created by Don - uploaded by Don - nominated by Don -- Don (talk) 07:25, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Don (talk) 07:25, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Welcome back! This is an absolutely humongous file, and it definitely focuses a lot of detail on the helicopter, but even at 30% of full size, the sky is quite posterized. Maybe you could smooth that out. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:07, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment and there are halos around all the edges. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:34, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, these seem to be Photoshop issues as I do not see these issues in the original. I will reload. --Don (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

I have reloaded a lightly corrected original over the original. Posterization is gone and halos are also gone. Thanks for the comments.--Don (talk) 07:25, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

Not all halos removed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:49, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Big improvement. Looks very good at 67% of full size, and as I said above, the detail and resolution on the helicopter is impressive. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:52, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 11:48, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - Samsung Galaxy S23. Wow! This is dope! ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 16:07, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

  Samsung Galaxy S23 Ultra 200mp camera. Thank you. Don (talk) 22:35, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:32, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Hot-air balloon in Tambov - 05.jpg

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2023 at 17:09:18 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Hot-air balloon in Tambov - 05.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Hot-air balloon in Tambov - 05.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Air transport#Aerostats
•  Info created by Alexander Novikov - uploaded by Alexander Novikov - nominated by Alexander Novikov -- Alexander Novikov (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Alexander Novikov (talk) 17:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support JukoFF (talk) 21:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Quite nice, but the sky could be a bit smoother (more denoised). I still might support as is, as the noise is subtle and pretty acceptable. I'm assuming that what look like stray marks in the sky are really birds, and if so, don't delete those. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
  • @Ikan Kekek: noise in the sky reduced. Yes, stray marks are a birds. Alexander Novikov (talk) 08:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks. Very subtle difference to my eyes. I like this photo very much, but I'm not convinced that it's one of the greatest on the site. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Which I guess means I should vote in weak opposition to a feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 09:54, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 23:31, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Painting?!? ★ 00:01, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support The light on the colorful ballons is beautiful. Appealing weather. The water reflection greatly enhances the composition -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:36, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The light and the colours are impressive. However, the right-hand side is probably deliberately plunged into darkness. Cropping would not help here either.--Ermell (talk) 09:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose underexposed - Benh (talk) 21:57, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 08:32, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Agree with Ermell and Benh. --Laitche (talk) 15:51, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 16:03, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose the tourist boats. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:50, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Nice composition but the whole image is very underexposed. BigDom (talk) 21:05, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Mercedes-Benz Concept CLA Class, IAA, Múnich, Alemania, 2023-09-10, DD 07.jpg

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2023 at 10:07:32 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Mercedes-Benz Concept CLA Class, IAA, Múnich, Alemania, 2023-09-10, DD 07.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Mercedes-Benz Concept CLA Class, IAA, Múnich, Alemania, 2023-09-10, DD 07.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Vehicles/Land vehicles#Automobiles
•  Info Mercedes-Benz Concept CLA Class, IAA in 2023, Munich, Germany. The vehicle is a concept car of the current Mercedes-Benz CLA-Class. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 10:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 10:07, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose All is ideal (car, lights, background), just you did not position well. Should be lower, to capture botom, and to cut some above background. Its not so sharp, despite low res. --Mile (talk) 12:33, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Bold statements, you talk about low res of a 25 MPx picture (which I cropped to square format) and you have a current FP of 4,4 MPx. Regarding POV and exposure I've to say that I have different versions with different POV and exposure but sorry, I like this one most. --Poco a poco (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Why do you say low res Mile? That would rule out any image from my camera. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:26, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment @Poco: good photographer should also position good, to cover with most area. My shot bellow is those "minimal" 4.4 Mpx (made od 5 MPx cam) but i covered 88%, while you put down 50%. You said have to cut to sqaure, good, but you take horizontal crop by 14%, i did 10%. I made 0.2 s shot on 2003 camera, without I.S. People today will have problem with that time on I.S. cameras, with same focal. Despite that (resolution) i think your hands were not so calm and i think pic could be much better. And crop is still problem, you should take more bottom and no croping above would be nesessary. Also yellow reflextion on mirror is killing colors around, we have "cold" colors of subject and back with warm yellow reflex. --Mile (talk) 16:44, 5 December 2023 (UTC) p.S. Also, why didnt put biger zoom, no crop would be needed at all.

• Something like [2], it much more for 3:2. --Mile (talk) 17:29, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• I like this crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:04, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose interesting setting, but could have been better caught as pointed out above. Underexposed as well. - Benh (talk) 13:41, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Of course, I missed you. Poco a poco (talk) 15:17, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Very nice play with the light patterns.--Ermell (talk) 17:00, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

* Neutral That car has a face that only a mother could love, but I like your choice of composition. The denoising was pretty aggressive though, and wiped out a lot of detail. If I'm reading the EXIF well, you used Lightroom's standard noise reduction and not the new AI one. If that's the case, why not give it a go? --Julesvernex2 (talk) 19:49, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Ok, let me try that and Topaz, let's see which one performs better. Poco a poco (talk) 20:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Julesvernex2: I uploaded the Topaz version, btw and for the record, definitely not my favourite car, not even brand, but still I nice shot, I believe. Poco a poco (talk) 21:32, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks Diego. I hoped for a bigger improvement but, looking at the shutter speed, mirror slap may have robbed you of a shaper image to begin with. I don't find cars to be a particularly interesting subject but I share Ikan Kekek's point below that this can be viewed as an abstract play of light and shadow, and your bold choice of composition reinforces that:  Support --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:39, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Nice photo to me, almost abstract-feeling, the way the lights echo the background and the reflections blur the line between the car and background. Sure, a little more room below the car could have been nice, but this composition is completely valid to me, and I'd encourage you all to view this composition abstractly and not on the basis of what would most clearly represent and contrast the car from its surroundings. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Unbalanced composition, sorry. This image needs more space at the bottom, in my view. A car is supposed to have wheels, even though not visible in this case, the current crop gives the impression that the picture is cut too tight. And the over-generous space granted to the top increases this feeling of imbalance -- Basile Morin (talk) 02:03, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support I like the image as a creative work in itself, the car is just one part of the whole. The booth designer did a great job here, which I think the photographer captured beautifully. -- Radomianin (talk) 10:00, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Randomianin. --SHB2000 (talk) 12:06, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support The crop is an esthetic choice, it works here. --Selbymay (talk) 07:24, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 08:02, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:54, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The idea is very cool. Unfortunately, it's noisy. - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 18:00, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

• ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺}: what area is noisy in your opinion (the image is denoise, see discussion above)? and would be the first version acceptable for you? thank you Poco a poco (talk) 18:43, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

  Sorry for my poor vocabulary. I don't know what it's called, but it's the space under the logos on the car. ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 16:01, 8 December 2023 (UTC)

• To be honest, I haven't seen anything that I feel needs to be fixed, ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} Poco a poco (talk) 18:38, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support It's an ad, but it's also a good photo. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  02:37, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support There is a certain dark Marvel vibe to this. ;-) --Cart (talk) 10:09, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Image:Sunken lane Pleinfeld Germany.jpg

Voting period ends on 14 Dec 2023 at 09:11:29 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/Image:Sunken lane Pleinfeld Germany.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/Image:Sunken lane Pleinfeld Germany.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Other#Germany
•  Info created by CG - uploaded by CG - nominated by CG -- CG (talk) 09:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Neutral as photo creater -- CG (talk) 09:11, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment You needed to get there before the snow melted, but perhaps the sun wasn't shining in the morning... Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:28, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment This is really good. The only thing that holds me back is that I don't love the look of the path. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:06, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak support per Ikan Kekek. - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 17:56, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support ★ 09:37, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Too much road and too little snow for me. Looks like it was photographed a bit too late in the day. With temperatures fluctuating during the first snowfalls, you need to get out early to get the good stuff, before thawing and car tracks ruin the scene. --Cart (talk) 10:14, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Halved blackberry (Rubus fruticosus).jpg

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2023 at 19:30:49 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Halved blackberry (Rubus fruticosus).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Halved blackberry (Rubus fruticosus).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food_and_drink#Fruits_(raw)
•  Info all by Ivar (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Ivar (talk) 19:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Super juicy blackberry that really whets the appetite! -- Radomianin (talk) 20:08, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 20:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment Not nearly as interesting as your two existing blackberry FPs. A different fruit? Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:23, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose as above Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:06, 10 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment Perhaps razor blade cut, but I don't find the result extraordinary in this case. Sorry the view of this side seems a bit awkward to me, like jelly. I can imagine a more interesting composition with two subjects, a whole one intact, and the other cut out (like here) -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:01, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Quite interesting and detailed. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Put it into a dish, its food, not some techincal object or similar. Cut with knife, seems bad idea, you are not seling plastic. --Mile (talk) 12:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose You've set a high standard with your previous fruit shots – this one doesn't work as well for me. --El Grafo (talk) 09:24, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Tomer T (talk) 10:46, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Blackberry is usually small, so to get a picture this big, you have to zoom in. There's no clue to say that Ivar didn't put it in a dish. - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 19:13, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose There is not much detail to appreciate inside the blackberry and therefore I wonder whether it was a good idea to show it like this instead of the whole fruit Poco a poco (talk) 19:17, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per Poco. -- Karelj (talk) 21:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment My first idea when I saw this half berry, was that you'd show the interior better and make a cool shot, if you put the sliced side down on a glass plate and lit it from behind. I bet all the seeds and the center thingy would show up nicely, same way this does. --Cart (talk) 22:59, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 17:30, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per my comment above. This photo is not living up to the scene's potential. --Cart (talk) 10:16, 11 December 2023 (UTC)
•  I withdraw my nomination -- Ivar (talk) 17:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:033 Male Ugandan kob trying to seduce a female at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2023 at 13:53:10 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:033 Male Ugandan kob trying to seduce a female at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:033 Male Ugandan kob trying to seduce a female at Queen Elizabeth National Park Photo by Giles Laurent.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)
•  Info created by Giles Laurent - uploaded by Giles Laurent - nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 13:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Fantastic composition, less impressive post-processing (e.g., sharpening artefacts in the fur, halos and aliasing in the grass blades). --Julesvernex2 (talk) 16:32, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you for your review, I uploaded a new version with no aliasing on the grass. For the white around the tip of some grass blades it is natural and not halo. As for the fur I think it is fine and I don’t see artefacts. Giles Laurent (talk) 22:13, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• From the three versions you've uploaded, I think the first one is the best: it's softer and noisier, but suffers much less from oversharpening. It's a great result for a shot taken at 600mm and cropped to ~20% of its original resolution, but I don't think it's at the level of your other wildlife images. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 08:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you for your comment. I don't see oversharpening on the fur. This picture is an action shot of animal behavior (an uganda kob trying to seduce a female (that in the end was not receptive, but the male got lucky with another female). In animal behavior you almost never know when something is going to happen before it is happening and 99% of the time, nothing special happens (only grass eating with the animal's head down, or moving). When something is finally happening you have to quickly move your lens to point it to the place the action is happening (a place where you're not necessarily already pointing at as the animals might have just been with the head down and not very visible), have the right parameters ready (which might have to be changed especially if photographing a still subject just before, which is often the case) and finaly press the button without shaking the camera. In that process many things can go wrong and the animal action often only lasts a few seconds so you have to be very quickly. In this case it was shot at 1/800s which is more than sufficient for such movement. Animal behavior beeing more rare and a lot more difficult to capture, I think that such pictures are generaly of higher value than pictures of still subjects. Therefore in my opinion this shot is of higher level than other shots of still subjects that I have made. Also, even if it wasn't as the same level of the others pictures I made, in my opinion it is still of FP level. Giles Laurent (talk) 10:38, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• I have no trouble believing that the shot was difficult to make (I own the same lens and have never captured anything nearly as exciting), and I suspect that the majority will agree with you that it is still at FP level. The FP threshold is (perhaps unavoidably) loosely defined, so disagreements here are to be expected. Less so on oversharpening, which should not be subjective. —Julesvernex2 (talk) 11:23, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  New file uploaded with sharpening of the fur reduced. What do you think now Julesvernex2 ? Giles Laurent (talk) 19:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks Giles, I think the artefacts are now mostly relegated to pixel peeping levels and I'm swayed by your explanation of the challenges of the shot, so switching to  Support --Julesvernex2 (talk) 21:04, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Looks like you are trying to save a picture which wasn't correctly focused. - Benh (talk) 23:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thank you for your review. As Basile said, I also think that both subjects are in focus. That also was the case in the first version. Giles Laurent (talk) 11:14, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  The result is still soft overall and I feel you hopelessly attempt to oversharpen it to make up for that, resulting in the small artifacts. - Benh (talk) 13:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  New file uploaded with sharpening reduced. What do you think now Benh ? Giles Laurent (talk) 21:27, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  I think it's a bit better so I removed my oppose. - Benh (talk) 10:12, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Interesting action shot of animals in a natural environment. The speed 1/800s was very appropriate in my view, to freeze the movement. The horns are in focus and the DoF quite successful to show both animals with a consistent level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  I am guessing this shot was taken hand-held with a bean-bag or special support from a safari vehicle. With my 500mm lens I find 1/1000 sec to 1/1250 my good-to-go setting in readiness for action shots. I suspect 1/800 sec with your 600mm lens will demand a very steady hand, especially if the engine is running. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:43, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  The engine was not running as it was a long break to observe. Also, I usually have quite a steady hand and the sensor 5-axis stabilisation compensation of the camera body and the lens stabilisation help with the rest. Giles Laurent (talk) 19:58, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Thanks very much for your edits; as for the grass, it's better now. -- Radomianin (talk) 08:22, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 19:10, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 08:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Yann (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Jakubhal 10:23, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Émile-Arthur Thouar by Eugène Pirou.jpg

Voting period ends on 13 Dec 2023 at 02:15:22 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Émile-Arthur Thouar by Eugène Pirou.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Émile-Arthur Thouar by Eugène Pirou.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1880-1889
•  Info created by Eugène Pirou - restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:15, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Info Accidentally nominated this a little prematurely: This is my third nomination, but my first only has a day to go. See Commons talk:FPC Down to two now Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:35, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

  Maybe acceptable… if there was a three nominations policy, but… (BTW, the FPC list is shorter than usual 🥱) ★ 05:02, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

  You noticed it and it wasn't a bad intention. In my opinion, we (I) can accept the exception. --XRay 💬 05:25, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support You can consider this is my nomination. Yann (talk) 11:27, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:39, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Valuable portrait of an interesting explorer. -- Radomianin (talk) 22:48, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  Really need to do some research to get an article with, y'know, citations in English Wikipedia. Not many cites in the French one, which'd probably be an issue if I translate it. Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support per Radomianin. Very good portrait. And there are now two nominations from Adam on the page. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:51, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  Again, apologies. Was trying to find out if there was a way to reset the timer, so I wouldn't need to nominate as Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Émile-Arthur Thouar by Eugène Pirou.jpg/2 Adam Cuerden (talk) 04:06, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 19:08, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --BigDom (talk) 21:04, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus plexippus) on Oyamel fir (Abies religiosa) Piedra Herrada.jpg

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2023 at 12:54:40 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus plexippus) on Oyamel fir (Abies religiosa) Piedra Herrada.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Monarch butterflies (Danaus plexippus plexippus) on Oyamel fir (Abies religiosa) Piedra Herrada.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera#Family : Nymphalidae (Brush-footed Butterflies)
•  Info The Monarch butterfly migration is one of the World's natural wonders. The monarchs overwinter in Mexico in a number of areas covering about seven hectares in total. The butterfly density is said to range from 10-50 million butterflies per hectare. Most roost in oyamel fir trees. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:54, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment At least the right part with this blurry foreground should be cropped out -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:05, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for the improvement. Interesting image but harsh light -- Basile Morin (talk) 00:52, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• The light doesn't penetrate well earlier or later and, if you want to see the butterflies fly, you have to hike up the mountain to the firs around midday. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Tentative oppose until Basile's concerns have been addressed. Ping me once that's done. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:53, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment One of the great wonders of nature, how lucky you are to have seen it. Purely for composition, I think a tighter crop would have been better, emphasizing that strong diagonal line and the airborne butterfly to the right. Taking in too much at once, can make a compo look busy. --Cart (talk) 13:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment The crop is much better; thanks to all @Basile Morin, SHB2000, and W.carter: . @SHB2000: I hadn't taken the trouble to crop as I wasn't going to nominate this until the discussion on habitat started... Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• Why start that discussion again? Your point of view has been firmly established, and your preference about where your photos are displayed should be respected. --Cart (talk) 13:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Improved crop that gives a clearer view of what is happening. From a distance at first glance you could mistake the butterflies for leaves :) -- Radomianin (talk) 13:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Can't believe I missed that, but thumbnail definitely doesn't do it justice. Sad this had little supports when boring rushed interiors pile them... - Benh (talk) 17:30, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Strong support I've never seen anything like this before! - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 19:07, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:51, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Monarch butterfly migration is indeed an incredible spectacle, but I don't think this does that spectacle justice. I think the main reason is the harsh light, which reduces the contrast in both color and shape between the orange butterflies and the [spruce?] they're sitting on. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  02:36, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Having looked at many other photos of this fantastic event, I don't think this delivers the impact of all those butterflies. There must have been several other angles to shoot this from, like along a branch filled with butterflies or something. The light isn't helping either, perhaps a polarizing filter could have saved the stark reflections on the butterflies' wings. Some surfaces in nature that you wouldn't expect to reflect light so much, actually do. It's always a let-down when you get home and check the photos. --Cart (talk) 10:21, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Western olive sunbird (Cyanomitra olivacea obscura) juvenile Ankasa.jpg

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2023 at 13:03:13 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Western olive sunbird (Cyanomitra olivacea obscura) juvenile Ankasa.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Western olive sunbird (Cyanomitra olivacea obscura) juvenile Ankasa.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family : Nectariniidae (Sunbirds and Spiderhunters)
•  Info No FPs of this species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:03, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 23:29, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Ermell (talk) 23:34, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Great picture of the bird, and it's a bonus that the branch echos its shape. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:29, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Good focus and high level of detail -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:08, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support In focus and good composition. --XRay 💬 05:40, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Great combination with the branch stump, and with air to breathe in the upper half; appropriate sharpening. -- Radomianin (talk) 09:42, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --SHB2000 (talk) 09:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:49, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Clément Bardot (talk) 12:01, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 13:59, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Question Charles, having you a lot of experience, I would like to ask you a question. According to the bird's posture, do you think it has a broken leg? --Terragio67 (talk) 15:09, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

• No; it is a fledgling, which is why I was so close. It is just out of the nest and will gain full strength very soon. I was taken to it by a local kid and I suspect he might have lifted it onto the branch, but he said he hadn't! Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:16, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

  * Support, and thanks for the explanation. Obviously, I was just and only curious about the strange posture... Terragio67 (talk) 20:30, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Charles, I think your latest nominations leverage AI tools much better, but this one is still overcooked: masking halos on edges (e.g., rump and back), rough in-focus to out-of-focus transitions (e.g., tail), aliasing on fine details (e.g., belly). --Julesvernex2 (talk) 09:29, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for the detailed review. New version uploaded @Julesvernex2: Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:38, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks for reprocessing it, Charles. I think there's less aliasing and smoother transitions, but the halo on the back is still there (looks like the sharpening mask is excluding the edge?). This new version is also darker and less saturated, not sure that was intended? My Topaz trial is over, but happy to have a go with DXO or Adobe in case the masking proves difficult to fix. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 13:49, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --GRDN711 (talk) 13:53, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 19:06, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --BigDom (talk) 21:03, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

File:San Carlo al Corso in Rome (4).jpg

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2023 at 15:00:02 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:San Carlo al Corso in Rome (4).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Carlo al Corso in Rome (4).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings/Ceilings#Italy
•  Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 15:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 15:00, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment You can improve this nomination by stating the name of the painter and linking the Wikipedia article that presumably exists about them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:54, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

   Done. Tournasol7 (talk) 15:51, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

• Thanks. I'm still considering. This is a very good photo, but I feel that more natural light could have been nicer. That's not an explanation for opposing, just something I'm thinking about. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:12, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 19:05, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Giles Laurent (talk) 19:32, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:51, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support The golden pattern of the ceiling produces a very nice composition in this side view, but the view of the fresco results a bit confusing because of the 90 degree rotation. Maybe it causes the slight discomfort associated to the picture. --Harlock81 (talk) 22:47, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay 💬 19:47, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Νικόλαος Κυριακάκης (talk) 14:11, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

File:San Carlo al Corso in Rome (6).jpg

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2023 at 14:58:04 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:San Carlo al Corso in Rome (6).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:San Carlo al Corso in Rome (6).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Italy
•  Info all by Tournasol7 -- Tournasol7 (talk) 14:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Abstain As author. Tournasol7 (talk) 14:58, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment I'm still considering, but I want to give this photo a little love as a good photo of a beautiful church interior. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:53, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support per above. Rich interior, clear photograph, reasonable crop. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Question Why are there many metal things on the right? - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 19:01, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment They are clearly doing restoration of some kind. That's scaffolding. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:14, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

  •  Weak support then. The scaffolding distracts me. - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 17:54, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support I think a portrait format would have been more advantageous. However, after daily reflection, I would like to support the image because the magnificent choir room stands out in an appealing way. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:15, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --XRay 💬 19:48, 9 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Chilean Flamingo at Chungara Lake 01.jpg

Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2023 at 13:10:28 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Chilean Flamingo at Chungara Lake 01.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Chilean Flamingo at Chungara Lake 01.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Phoenicopteridae_(Flamingos)
•  Info created by - uploaded by - nominated by Satdeep Gill -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Satdeep Gill (talk) 13:10, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Wonderful mirror image. Could we please have at least one more category for the location? Thanks! --Kritzolina (talk) 13:44, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Tournasol7 (talk) 15:08, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The bird's head is not in focus. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose The whoule bird is unfortunately a bit too blurry for my taste.--Ermell (talk) 19:59, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose per Charles + Ermell. --SHB2000 (talk) 09:50, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Info Gallery link refined: …/Birds#Family : Phoenicopteridae (Flamingos) -- Radomianin (talk) 10:03, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose per above. - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 18:59, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

File:Ingresso della Rocca di Bertinoro, Emilia-Romagna, Italy (nov 2023).jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 12 Dec 2023 at 02:59:38 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Ingresso della Rocca di Bertinoro, Emilia-Romagna, Italy (nov 2023).jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Ingresso della Rocca di Bertinoro, Emilia-Romagna, Italy (nov 2023).jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Italy
•  Info Main entrance of the Bertinoro fortress (Rocca di Bertinoro, Emilia-Romagna, Italy), seen from the Giardino dei Popoli place. Nowadays the fortress hosts a university. Created, uploaded and nominated by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 02:59, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 02:59, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --Palauenc05 (talk) 09:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Dull light, sorry. The pipe in the foreground is quite unfortunate. Very average composition in my view, with an awkward crop at the top -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:14, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

  Thanks, reading your evaluation I think I can propose a second version with a different angle. Please,@Palauenc05 and Basile, can you check in your opinion if it looks better than the previous image? Terragio67 (talk) 05:18, 4 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry, although not an FP for me, the first version is still slightly better in my view. -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks for your opinion and your time Basile, I appreciate it. Terragio67 (talk) 17:15, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support This version is better than alt.--MZaplotnik^(talk) 15:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Weak support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 18:57, 6 December 2023 (UTC)

Alternative version

•  Info Main entrance of the Bertinoro fortress (Rocca di Bertinoro, Emilia-Romagna, Italy), seen from the Giardino dei Popoli place. Nowadays the fortress hosts a university.
•  Oppose Dull light, unfortunate pipe, and busy composition in my view, with an odd crop at the left -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:12, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 4 support, 1 oppose, 0 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:18, 12 December 2023 (UTC))

File:Goat Slaughter for Christmas Dinner- A Margarita Island Tradition.jpg, not featured

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 11 Dec 2023 at 22:42:20 (UTC)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.

Featured picture candidates/File:Goat Slaughter for Christmas Dinner- A Margarita Island Tradition.jpg Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Goat Slaughter for Christmas Dinner- A Margarita Island Tradition.jpg

• Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Food and drink#Food : Processing, preparing and cooking
•  Info I have corrected errors present in a previous nomination. The image of the goat slaughter for Christmas dinner on Margarita Island, Venezuela, imho deserves to be highlighted for its documentary and educational value, as it captures a significant century-old cultural tradition in the region. It offers a window into cultural practices that may be unknown to many, allowing for a deeper understanding of customs and ways of life in different parts of the world. Additionally, it reflects the reality of how food is obtained in various cultures, a truth often hidden in modern society. The visual representation, even though stark, of these traditions plays a relevant role in preserving and understanding cultural diversity and global food practices. All by -- Wilfredor (talk) 22:42, 2 December 2023 (UTC)

Appended {{Nsfw}} to this image. Please remember to do so for future graphic nominations, Wilfredor. --SHB2000 (talk) 03:46, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't know about this template--Wilfredor (talk) 03:49, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

Not a problem :-). I'm glad I was able to help. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment You should mention that you nominated this before. I think it's fine to feature a photo of a slaughter, and thought so when it was last nominated, but I don't understand why you would expect a different outcome this time. Could you please explain? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:25, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

In my nomination comment, I wrote "I have corrected errors present in a previous nomination." This indicates that there was a prior nomination and I addressed the issues noted in the old nomination that led to its rejection. In the previous version (see the history), there was a shirt that stood out and disrupted the composition, which I have now removed. --Wilfredor (talk) 04:37, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Alright, I'll support this as a good composition and well-executed photograph of something I think particularly people who eat meat should see and consider, but my recollection is that the main reason your previous nomination was rejected is that even many meat-eaters find it gross to look at an image of how meat is produced. (After looking at the relevant thread, I see that 4 of the 7 opposing votes were based at least partly on objection to the subject matter, as opposed to 6 supporting votes.) I think the previous FPC nomination thread may be relevant: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Goat killed at Christmas Lunch.jpg. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:14, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

• The goat probably had a better life than the poor creatures in industrial life stock farming where most of our meat comes from. --imehling (talk) 09:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

• I feel pretty sure it did. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:23, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

This animal was a very loved animal and treated like a domestic dog would be treated. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:38, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Educational and an excellent image photography wise. To me it is not overly gross, it is depicting the scene (which of course deals with death and blood) without highlighting anything especially cruel. --Kritzolina (talk) 08:06, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support per Kritzolina. --SHB2000 (talk) 08:45, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --imehling (talk) 09:50, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Anti-wow for me. --Palauenc05 (talk) 10:15, 3 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Poorly composed. Image taken 4 days after Christmas so description is inaccurate. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:39, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

In Spanish the party has the same name and refers to the family reunion and sharing at the end of the year. --Wilfredor (talk) 19:36, 3 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support --MZaplotnik^(talk) 16:37, 4 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Technically : the eye is out of focus, the DoF too shallow, the light dull, and the crop tight at the bottom.

Culinary : The same knife cutting vegetables or fruits would be more educational, in my opinion 🥕🥑🍉. For the environment, since the biggest part of the production of cereals is used to feed farm animals, the meat consumption should be reduced on the planet. The pot of blood makes me think it's going to go on the stove, and this dish doesn't seem appetizing to me at all (matter of taste maybe).

Wow factor : unpleasant image to look at, in my view. I don't find any aesthetic in this content. Bland colors, focus on the blood, defenseless animal, just an unpleasant and repelling sight. Sure, you need strong nerves to cut an animal's neck like a butcher, but it's also violent, and not a practice that I personally encourage, nor admire, nor take pleasure in watching, even for the adrenaline.

Ethics : If necessary to kill an animal, I always prefer to see them knocked out beforehand. As when a surgeon operates they usually give you a numbing shot. Animal welfare could be considered here. Hedonism is a philosophy that I feel close to, and here I take no pleasure in seeing this animal blocked and drowned in his blood. Although you can explain me that a bunch of hungry people are waiting around the table for their Christmas feast, these are not the happy people shown here, nor even the "fair deal" -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:47, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

The DOF is in the hand because it is the action that is being performed. The depiction of an animal prepared for consumption, although disturbing to some, is an honest representation of a practice that is part of many cultures and livelihoods. The representation of an animal prepared for consumption can open a dialogue about ethical meat consumption and animal welfare. It challenges viewers to consider the realities behind their food choices and to think about how animals are treated throughout the food production process. It is true that the image may be crude, it can also serve as a reminder of the importance of human practices in meat production and the respect that must be given to the animals that are part of this process.--Wilfredor (talk) 05:02, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Focus : Hand in focus, but not the eye (important element). The photographer could get both in focus (like here). Shallow DoF. Aperture f/5.6, probably not enough. Or not the best angle.

What would "challenge" people in questioning their practice would be to show different solutions, like cultured meat, insects as food, or vegetarian cuisine in my opinion -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:20, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Photos of vegetarian cuisine don't challenge meat-eaters because many of them gladly have some vegetarian meals. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 05:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Many meat eaters would love to change their culinary habits, but the diversity of dishes often appear limited. Appetizing dishes made of vegetables would only suggest to try the same at home. Same when a delicious vegetarian restaurant becomes famous, you often want to try, to taste what is inside, to learn how it is prepared -- Basile Morin (talk) 05:50, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Basile, your comment limits culinary education, it is also important to recognize the role of meat in various cultures and diets, while the image in question may not be to everyone's taste, it offers an honest depiction, encouraging important conversations about ethical food practices and sustainable, portraying the realities of meat preparation, including the uncomfortable aspects, is super important for a transparent understanding of our food systems. People need to be aware of the entire process, including aspects that may feel raw Wilfredor (talk) 06:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

No, you can wrap your "slaughter" in a pretty gift package with a pink ribbon 🎁, I'm not likely to find it more aesthetically pleasing, not technically better.

Please also consider changing your gallery to Food and drink#Food : Processing, preparing and cooking if you think it's about food preparation. Because currently your chosen gallery is "Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family : Bovidae (Bovids)". A template {{Retouched}} also seems adequate according to the history of the image.

My comment limits to the FP label. I never said the image was a fair candidate for deletion, I just dislike looking at it, so I tried to find the words to explain rationally my feelings. Anyone is free to disagree of course, and you're free to love your own artwork.

I totally understand and respect concise opinions too. Certainly different ways to send the same message. Best regards -- Basile Morin (talk) 06:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Comment Basile is right about the gallery, this photo is about food. I have fixed that now. That is also kinder to viewers who go looking for cute goats in the animal section. Food preparation in its basic form is seldom pretty, and most people are too far removed from it. I see no cruelty in this. It is very much like the scenes we had here in our countryside not very long ago, when the Christmas pig was slaughtered. (Some still do and I've helped; it's a lot of work.) Same technique, there is even a special name for it in Swedish "sticka grisen". Any hunter will do the same with their kill. You only have a few minutes to drain the blood, or it will coagulate and make the meat rigid. Stabbing the throat while the animal is hanging upside down, is the most effective way to do this. Collecting the blood in a bucket is also a "waste nothing" measure. During the draining of the animal, the blood in the bowl is whipped by an assistant to separate the coagulating component that can spoil it too fast, from the main part of the liquid. The blood is then used to make blackpudding, sausages or soup. I'm also very ok with the file name. In many cultures, 'Christmas' is a generic name for the whole season and not just for a few special days; and the date of the most special day of that season also varies. The focus on the hand is also correct, since this image is about the process of slaughter, not an animal photo. To put it bluntly: At this point we are looking at meat, not an animal, so the eye is unimportant. The arterial sprouting that stained the goat's cheek has subsided and the animal is gone. --Cart (talk) 10:42, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support Thanks to everyone on this discussion group for your reviews and thoughts on the image. I once visited the Disgusting Food Museum, where you could also see the extremely inhumane, brutal behavior that humans inflict on animals. When I left the museum, I felt sick for the rest of the day and I skipped dinner. It took me a while to absorb what I had seen. It is difficult for me to promote the image for ethical reasons, but slaughter is a brutal part of human civilization. From a documentary point of view, as part of everyday life, I decided to support this work. -- Radomianin (talk) 12:09, 5 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Comment I've been a vegetarian for my entire adult life but, much like Radomianin, would like to put feelings aside and support the image. Why doesn't it have a {{Retouched}} template though, as Basile suggested? Wilfredor, these nominations feel like Groundhog Day, with an endless stream of non-declared image and text manipulations. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 14:06, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

   Done I clearly remember that movie where it repeats itself every day. I have added the template, just as I had already added a comment in the history. Thanks Wilfredor (talk) 14:36, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support Thank you! --Julesvernex2 (talk) 14:40, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose The photo is certainly unique, but too many parts are blurred, apart from the focus, even on the animal's head, particularly towards the eyes... In addition, the person's arm is too much distracting . So yes, it may be a difficult photo to take, because you can't easily reshoot the photo, but on a technical level, it's just worth the IQ label for me. --Sebring12Hrs (talk) 19:31, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  The photography we are discussing presents not juste a unique and artistic purpose, which deserves to be understood in its context. Capturing the exact moment of an animal in its last moments of life is not a simple task; We are dealing with a living being in a state of intense agitation, not with an inert, static object. This, of course, influences the technique and the final result of the image. First, let's talk about focus. What might be perceived as a lack of sharpness is actually a decision known as Depth of Field (DoF). This technique involves selectively focusing certain areas of the image while blurring others. In this specific case, the use of DoF is not accidental but intentional, and is intended to highlight the main element of the scene: the action of the slaughter. If you check out Cart's comment, you'll see that this effect is often used to direct the viewer's attention to the narrative focus of the image. Regarding the presence of arms in the composition, it is essential to understand the practical and realistic context of the situation. We are facing an animal that, by nature, resists in its last moments. The need to hold it is not only a matter of procedure but also an integral part of the composition of the image. The arms you see in the photograph are not an accidental intrusion, but a necessary representation of the reality of the situation Wilfredor (talk) 20:03, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

Isn't it getting ridiculous what a fuss is made about a mediocre picture of cutting an animal's throat? Do I get it right? The goat has been kept as a pet, like a dog, therefore it's killed before (or after?) Christmas, the image is highly educational (???), and in fact, every carnivore wikimedian should study it to either understand different cultures or at least become a political correct vergetarian. And then these overdone AI explanations by the nominator which cannot persuade me to search the "narrative focus of the image". Believing several comments above, the image has quite a few technical issues. I can't support these opinions, as I'm not really willing to have a closer look at this picture. --Palauenc05 (talk) 21:28, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose! The picture is disgusting. In my opinion it would be absurd to think about any possible artistic value or to point out the difficulties of taking such a photo. In reality, no one needs such an image, even though there may be people who can find amusement in the suffering of animals. I am also a meat eater, but to see the killing of an animal as an aesthetic pleasure is, in my opinion, abnormal. -- Spurzem (talk) 22:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  Precisely for this reason this image must be shown to show what many want to hide or are uncomfortable with accepting that behind a piece of meat there is a cruelly killed animal. This is nothing artistic Wilfredor (talk) 22:30, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, but you aren't going to win this argument in this forum. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 22:57, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

  I know this, I am not trying to win anything, I am aware that FPC is fundamentally a Westernized and mainly European vision. My intention is not to win FPCs, but to post topics that encourage reflection instead of photos of architectural constructions. Many of my photos involve underdeveloped culture Wilfredor (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Support - ABAL1412^{🇻🇳🇸🇺🇷🇺} (talk ☭) 18:55, 6 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support there's no rule anywhere that says that FPs must be pretty, or even pleasant to look at. Different standards apply for different genres. This is documentary photography. Its purpose is not to make a nice picture you'd like to hang on your wall. Its purpose is to show a part of reality, and ideally make you think. Until very, very recently, this kind of view has been 100% normal pretty much anywhere on the planet, and in many, many places it still is. Does it make you uncomfortable? Do you feel superior when you say "this is wrong"? What does that tell you about the society you live in? Is it wrong? What is "normal" anyway? Maybe you are abnormal if you get scared by a little bit of blood and death? Is there any point in worrying about a couple of goats here and there, don't we have much bigger fish to fry? Thinking of it, what's the point in worrying about a single little planet in an infinite universe full of galaxies full of solar systems full of planets? Does anything actually matter? --El Grafo (talk) 09:19, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

  Since you start to talk morals and the bigger fish ... I fully agree with you, first of all. And I want to add that I often wonder how images about beautifully depicted war planes, big cars and so on don't get the same kind of moral discussion ... aren't they also part of the bigger picture? Kritzolina (talk) 09:50, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

• You guys seem to be mixing moral judgements of the image with moral judgements of its voters. In my view, the former is useful but the latter is not. Note how the discussion above, despite stirring up strong emotions, focuses overwhelmingly on the image and not on those holding different opinions. --Julesvernex2 (talk) 10:23, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

  For the record, I'm not judging anyone but myself here. The point I'm trying to make above is that this is a documentary photograph and it is supposed to stir you up a bit. The questions I wrote down reflect thoughts I was personally pondering while digesting the image (maybe I should have used "me" instead of "you", but I thought it might resonate better that way). For some of these questions I found an answer I didn't like, for some I may never find one – and I'm OK with that. It's very thought-provoking image. El Grafo (talk) 11:53, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

• Got it, sorry for misinterpreting what you said! On your internal struggle about this image, perhaps you'll find Sam Harris' latest discussion with Peter Singer useful: [3] --Julesvernex2 (talk) 12:10, 7 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Good capture of what's intended to show, but no wow. --Milseburg (talk) 16:53, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support It may be crude but it is useful to raise awareness of how the death of an animal can be more terrible than many people think when buying their pieces of meat in the supermarket. --Wilfredor (talk) 21:45, 8 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Support --RodRabelo7 (talk) 02:10, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  ambivalent - Unlike, for example, the pacu jawi and bullfighting images nominated in the past, it's hard to say this glorifies animal cruelty. It's the preparation of food in all its bloody reality. It's also a frank, direct depiction of that reality. The thing is, because it's a close-up, it could be anywhere. It doesn't really depict a cultural tradition. So there's value in a frank, direct depiction of the reality of slaughtering a goat, but I don't know if there's enough "wow" there for me. — Rhododendrites ^talk |  02:27, 9 December 2023 (UTC)
•  Oppose Per my comment above, nothing really 'wrong' with the photo, it's a good "how to" photo, just missing the wow or that extra emotion a great photo should deliver. --Cart (talk) 10:25, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• I think it has delivered lots of emotions ;-) --imehling (talk) 16:30, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

• Yes, but not for me and when I vote, I can only speak for myself. --Cart (talk) 20:34, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

•  Oppose Without denying the documental value, I think that a wider shot could have been better. As Basile said, too many flaws. --Selbymay (talk) 18:55, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Confirmed results:

Result: 11 support, 8 oppose, 1 neutral → not featured. /Basile Morin (talk) 05:17, 12 December 2023 (UTC)

Timetable (day 5 after nomination)

Thu 07 Dec → Tue 12 Dec
Fri 08 Dec → Wed 13 Dec
Sat 09 Dec → Thu 14 Dec
Sun 10 Dec → Fri 15 Dec
Mon 11 Dec → Sat 16 Dec
Tue 12 Dec → Sun 17 Dec

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

Sun 03 Dec → Tue 12 Dec
Mon 04 Dec → Wed 13 Dec
Tue 05 Dec → Thu 14 Dec
Wed 06 Dec → Fri 15 Dec
Thu 07 Dec → Sat 16 Dec
Fri 08 Dec → Sun 17 Dec
Sat 09 Dec → Mon 18 Dec
Sun 10 Dec → Tue 19 Dec
Mon 11 Dec → Wed 20 Dec
Tue 12 Dec → Thu 21 Dec

Closing a featured picture promotion request

The bot

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

Manual procedure

Any experienced user may close requests.

1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
   Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}}
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
2. Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
   featured or not featured
   For example:
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
   becomes
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured ===
3. Save your edit.
4. If it is featured:
   • Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
   • Also add the picture to 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/December 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.

Closing a delisting request

1. In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
   Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)
   '''Result:''' x delist, x keep, x neutral => /not/ delisted. ~~~~
   (for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/Image:Astrolabe-Persian-18C.jpg)
2. Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
   delisted or not delisted
   For example:
   === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted ===
3. Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/December 2023.
4. If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
   1. Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
   2. Edit the picture's description as follows:
      1. Replace the template {{Featured picture}} on the image description page by {{Delisted picture}}. If using the {{Assessments}} template, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes).
      2. Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night 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/December 2023), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.