Commons:Quality images candidates

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Shortcut
Skip to nominations
Quality images logo.svg

These are the candidates for becoming quality images. This is not the same thing as featured pictures. If you want informal feedback on your photos, please ask at Commons:Photography critiques.

Purpose[edit]

The purpose of quality images is to encourage the people that are the foundation of Commons, the individual users who provide the unique images that expand this collection. While featured pictures identifies the absolute best of all the images loaded into Commons, Quality images sets out to identify and encourage users’ efforts in providing quality images to Commons. Additionally, quality images should be a place to refer other users to when explaining methods for improving an image.


Guidelines[edit]

All nominated images should be the work of Commons users.

For nominators[edit]

Below are the general guidelines for Quality images; more detailed criteria are available at Image guidelines.

Image page requirements[edit]
  1. Copyright status. Quality image candidates have to be uploaded to Commons under a suitable license. The full license requirements are at Commons:Copyright tags.
  2. Images should comply with all Commons policies and practices, including Commons:Photographs of identifiable people.
  3. Quality images shall have a meaningful file name, be properly categorized and have an accurate description on the file page in one or more languages. It is preferred, but not mandatory, to include an English description.
  4. No advertisements or signatures in image. Copyright and authorship information of quality images should be located on the image page and may be in the image metadata, but should not interfere with image contents.
Creator[edit]

Pictures must have been created by a Wikimedian in order to be eligible for QI status. This means that pictures from, for example, Flickr are ineligible. (Note that Featured Pictures do not have this requirement.) Photographical reproductions of two-dimensional works of art, made by Wikimedians, are eligible (and should be licensed PD-old according to the Commons guidelines). If an image is promoted despite not being the creation of a Wikimedian, the QI status should be removed as soon as the mistake is detected.

Technical requirements[edit]

More detailed criteria are available at Commons:Image guidelines.

Resolution[edit]

Bitmapped images (JPEG, PNG, GIF, TIFF) should normally have at least 2 megapixels; reviewers may demand more for subjects that can be photographed easily. This is because images on Commons may be printed, viewed on monitors with very high resolution, or used in future media. This rule excludes vector graphics (SVG) or computer-generated images that have been constructed with freely-licensed or open software programs as noted in the image's description.

Image quality[edit]

Digital images can suffer various problems originating in image capture and processing, such as preventable noise, problems with JPEG compression, lack of information in shadow or highlight areas, or problems with capture of colors. All these issues should be handled correctly.

Composition and lighting[edit]

The arrangement of the subject within the image should contribute to the image. Foreground and background objects should not be distracting. Lighting and focus also contribute to the overall result; the subject should be sharp, uncluttered, and well-exposed.

Value[edit]

Our main goal is to encourage quality images being contributed to Wikicommons, valuable for Wikimedia and other projects.

How to nominate[edit]

Simply add a line of this form at the top of Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list Nominations section:

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description  --~~~~ |}}

The description shouldn't be more than a few words, and please leave a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries.

If you are nominating an image by another Wikimedian, include their username in the description as below:

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description (by [[User:USERNAME|USERNAME]]) --~~~~ |}}

Note: there is a Gadget, QInominator, which makes nominations quicker. It adds a small "Nominate this image for QI" link at the top of every file page. Clicking the link adds the image to a list of potential candidates. When this list is completed, edit Commons:Quality images candidates/candidate list. At the top of the edit window a green bar will be displayed. Clicking the bar inserts all potential candidates into the edit window.

Number of nominations[edit]

No more than five images per day can be added by a single nominator.

Note: If possible, for every picture you nominate, please review at least one of the other candidates.

Evaluating images[edit]

Any registered user whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits, other than the author and the nominator, can review a nomination. For an easier evaluation you can activate the gadget QICvote

When evaluating images the reviewer should consider the same guidelines as the nominator.

How to review[edit]

How to update the status

Carefully review the image. Open it in full resolution, and check if the quality criteria are met.

  • If you decide to promote the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Promotion|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you liked it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Promotion and add your signature, possibly with some short comment.

  • If you decide to decline the nomination, change the relevant line from
File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Nomination|Very short description --~~~~ | }}

to

File:ImageNameHere.jpg|{{/Decline|Very short description --Nominators signature |Why you didn't like it. --~~~~}}

In other words, change the template from /Nomination to /Decline and add your signature, possibly with a statement of the criteria under which the image failed (you can use titles of section from the guidelines). If there are many problems, please note only 2 or 3 of the most severe, or add multiple problems. When declining a nomination please do explain the reasons on the nominator’s talk page – as a rule, be nice and encouraging! In the message you should give a more detailed explanation of your decision.

Note: Please evaluate the oldest images first.

Grace period and promotion[edit]

If there are no objections within a period of 2 days (exactly 48 hours) from the first review, the image becomes promoted or fails according to the review it received. If you have objection, just change its status to Discuss and it will be moved to the Consensual review section.

How to execute decision[edit]

QICbot automatically handles this 2 days after a decision has been made, and promoted images are cached in Commons:Quality Images/Recently promoted awaiting categorization before their automatic insertion in to appropriate Quality images pages.

If you believe that you have identified an exceptional image that is worthy of Featured picture status then consider also nominating the image at Commons:Featured picture candidates.

Manual instructions (open only in cases of emergency)

If promoted,

  1. Add the image to appropriate group or groups of Quality images page. The image also needs to be added to the associated sub pages, only 3–4 of the newest images should be displayed on the main page.
  2. Add {{QualityImage}} template to the bottom of image description page.
  3. Move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2022.
  4. Add the template {{File:imagename.jpg}} to the user’s talk page.

If declined,

  1. move the line with the image nomination and review to Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 2022.
  • Images awaiting review show the nomination outlined in blue.
  • Images the reviewer has accepted show the nomination outlined in green
  • Images the reviewer has rejected show the nomination outlined in red

Unassessed images (nomination outlined in blue)[edit]

Nominated images which have not generated assessments either to promote nor to decline, or a consensus (equal opposition as support in consensual review) after 8 days on this page should be removed from this page without promotion, archived in Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 21 2022 and Category:Unassessed QI candidates added to the image.

Consensual review process[edit]

Consensual review is a catch all place used in the case the procedure described above is insufficient and needs discussion for more opinions to emerge.

How to ask for consensual review[edit]

To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day.

Please only send things to consensual review that have been reviewed as promoted/declined. If, as a reviewer, you cannot make a decision, add your comments but leave the candidate on this page.

Consensual review rules[edit]

See Commons:Quality images candidates#Rules

Page refresh: purge this page's cache

Nominations[edit]

Due to the Mediawiki parser code ~~~~ signatures will only work on this page if you have JavaScript enabled. If you do not have JavaScript enabled please manually sign with:

--[[User:yourname|yourname]] 04:29, 21 December 2022 (UTC)
  • Please open a new date section if you are nominating an image after 0:00 o'clock (UTC)
  • Please insert a blank line between your new entry and any existing entries
  • Please help in reviewing "old" nominations here below first; many are still unassessed
  • If you see terms with which you are unfamiliar, please see explanations at Photography terms

December 21, 2022[edit]

December 20, 2022[edit]

December 19, 2022[edit]

December 18, 2022[edit]

December 17, 2022[edit]

December 16, 2022[edit]

December 15, 2022[edit]

December 14, 2022[edit]

December 13, 2022[edit]

December 12, 2022[edit]

December 11, 2022[edit]

December 10, 2022[edit]

December 9, 2022[edit]

December 8, 2022[edit]

December 7, 2022[edit]

December 5, 2022[edit]

Consensual review[edit]

Rules

These rules are in accordance with the procedures normally followed in this section. If you don’t agree with them please feel free to propose changes.

  • To ask for consensual review, just change the /Promotion, /Decline to /Discuss and add your comments immediately following the review. An automatic bot will move it to the consensual review section within one day. Alternatively move the image line from the main queue to Consensual Review/Images and follow the instructions in the edit window.
  • You can move an image here if you contest the decision of the reviewer or have doubts about its eligibility (in which case an 'oppose' is assumed). In any case, please explain your reasons. Our QICBot will move it for you. When the bot moves it, you might have to revisit the nomination and expand your review into the Consensual Review format and add "votes".
  • The decision is taken by majority of opinions, including the one of the first reviewer and excluding the nominator's. After a minimum period of 48 hours since the last entry, the decision will be registered at the end of the text using the template {{QICresult}} and then executed, according to the Guidelines.
Using {{support}} or {{oppose}} will make it easier to count your vote.
Votes by anonymous contributors aren't counted
  • In case of draw, or if no additional opinions are given other than the first reviewer's, the nomination can be closed as inconclusive after 8 days, counted from its entry.
  • Turn any existing comments into bullet points—add Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose and Symbol support vote.svg Support if necessary.
  • Add a comment explaining why you've moved the image here - be careful to stay inside the braces.
  • Preview and save with a sensible edit summary like "+Image:Example.jpg".


Support :it may be minor colour corrections but top right trees are the normal visual by the lens this is not any mistakes


File:Шманьківці,_Каплиця_Святого_Миколая,_1617.jpg[edit]

Шманьківці, Каплиця Святого Миколая, 1617.jpg

File:San_Francisco_(CA,_USA),_Alcatraz,_Barracks_--_2022_--_3177.jpg[edit]

San Francisco (CA, USA), Alcatraz, Barracks -- 2022 -- 3177.jpg

  • Nomination Barracks, Alcatraz Island, San Francisco, California, USA --XRay 04:13, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Discussion
    Noisy, mostly not in focus. Fixable? --Tagooty 04:42, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
    ✓ Done @Tagooty: I can't elimate the noise (light conditions in the building), but I improved the noise reduction. IMO good enough. What do you think? --XRay 07:08, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
    Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Sorry, it is not QI to me. Move it to CR if you want other opinions. --Tagooty 14:22, 18 December 2022 (UTC)
    IMO the photograph is QI. Yes, there is some noise. But it's taken inside. Sharpness is good enough too. --XRay 08:20, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose I think it's neither sharp nor relatively noiseless enough. -- Ikan Kekek 03:49, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Jerman_Beach,_Kuta,_Bali,_Indonesia,_20220825_1331_0833.jpg[edit]

Jerman Beach, Kuta, Bali, Indonesia, 20220825 1331 0833.jpg

Running total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 03:51, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:OT-2459_in_Butakovskiy_Gulf_2016-05-07_Pic_03.JPG[edit]

OT-2459 in Butakovskiy Gulf 2016-05-07 Pic 03.JPG

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Peulle 11:43, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Uddarige.jpg[edit]

Uddarige.jpg

  • Nomination From Kottige to Moode, Uddarige is one of many ancient varieties of Thondoor Addye (Idli/ Steamed Dumplings) from Tulunadu. Originating from Tulunadu, these idlis are steamed in a Thondoor (referring to a vessel in which they are prepared), in wicker baskets lined with the leaves of the Indian Coral tree (Pongare da Ere) which can be substituted with Banana leaves. The bark and leaves of the Indian Coral Tree are mainly the parts used for preparing indegenous remedies for various ailments in the Indian subcontinent. Also known as ‘Uddarige’ in Tulu, this is a hardier version of the idli made of a fermented batter of par-boiled rice variety (prepared by steaming paddy) and urad dal. It is usually eaten with Thimare (Gotukola herb) chutney that is available during monsoon or with spicy chicken preparations. Uddarige is a hearty breakfast dish made on festive occasions such as Krishnashtami celebrations along with other delicacies. By User:Vaipujary --Kritzolina 11:15, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Discussion
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --RockyMasum 19:24, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose crop --Charlesjsharp 22:56, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Unusual perspective, but excellent lighting, good sharpness, and appealing colours. --Smial 00:24, 19 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The upper left basket is truncated. --F. Riedelio 07:32, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The dishes are sharp and look great. We've been told before that cropping out part of the sides is common and a generally accepted practice in food photography. I'd prefer more generous crops left and right, but I don't think this is other than a good picture, regardless. -- Ikan Kekek 03:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 03:54, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Marcq_1_3_av_petite_hollande.jpg[edit]

Marcq 1 3 av petite hollande.jpg

  • Nomination Twin houses, Avenue de la Petite Hollande 1 & 3, Marcq-en-Barœul, France --Velvet 08:23, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Discussion
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The car in the front spoils the compo in my opinion --Poco a poco 10:04, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support In a city, it is realy difficult to have no cars in front of a construction. For me, good quality. --Jmh2o 17:54, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Very sharp, good perspective, and per Jmh2o. --Sebring12Hrs 11:39, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The car is cropped and I miss the bottom of the car. A cropped dar at the left or right is mostly no problem for me --Michielverbeek 19:30, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support The house is the object of the photo - and that is well shot. --Zinnmann 20:00, 18 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The cars are truncated and cover a part of the building. --F. Riedelio 07:29, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose The presence of the cars is forgivable to me, but look at the aggressive noise on the parts of the door on the right that are in shadow, etc. -- Ikan Kekek 03:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Decline?   --Ikan Kekek 03:56, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:BMW_Isetta_250_Classic-Gala_2022_1X7A0118.jpg[edit]

BMW Isetta 250 Classic-Gala 2022 1X7A0118.jpg

Running total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Promote?   --Ikan Kekek 03:58, 21 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Twr_Bach_Llanddwyn_Island_Lighthouse.jpg[edit]

Twr Bach Llanddwyn Island Lighthouse.jpg

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Sandro Halank 21:32, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:সোমপুর_বৌদ্ধ_বিহার.jpg[edit]

সোমপুর বৌদ্ধ বিহার.jpg

  • Nomination পাহাড়পুর বৌদ্ধ বিহার বা সোমপুর মহা বিহার বাংলাদেশের একটি প্রাচীন বৌদ্ধ বিহার যা বর্তমানে ধ্বংসাবশেষ। By User:Shafiul Islam Shaikot --Yahya 20:43, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Decline
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Ermell 21:02, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Aishik Rehman 21:29, 11 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Wasiul Bahar 09:02, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose Oversaturation. --A.Savin 14:08, 13 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose for now, per A.Savin. The green is oversaturated. -- Ikan Kekek 06:28, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose It lacks sharpness and colors are oversaturated. --Sebring12Hrs 09:32, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose oversaturated. MS Sakib (talk) 14:25, 15 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose no QI --Sandro Halank 21:33, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose → Symbol declined.svg Declined   --Peulle 11:59, 20 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

File:Kama_River_in_Tatarstan._River_passenger_ship_M-8_P6210826_2540.jpg[edit]

Kama River in Tatarstan. River passenger ship M-8 P6210826 2540.jpg

  • Nomination Kama River in Tatarstan. River passenger ship M-8 --Alexxx1979 10:03, 4 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Discussion
    I think its tilted counter clock wise. --C messier 17:37, 10 December 2022 (UTC)
    Symbol support vote.svg Support Good quality. --Zinnmann 10:01, 12 December 2022 (UTC)
    I made a suggestion for fixing, now I have to Symbol oppose vote.svg Oppose until it is fixed, and move the photo to discuss. --C messier 16:26, 12 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment If you want to oppose, make sure to vote. I'm not seeing the problem, though; could you specify what you're seeing? -- Ikan Kekek 06:34, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment the opposite side of the river bank is tilted, which IMHO isn't expected given the viewing angle. --C messier 12:31, 14 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
  • Pictogram voting comment.svg Comment While the tilt issue is being worked on, would also suggest tighter cropping. There are not that many images of this ship and a tighter focus would be an improvement. --GRDN711 14:41, 16 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → More votes?   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:58, 17 December 2022 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Timetable (day 8 after nomination)[edit]

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