Knowledge:Featured picture candidates

2133: 3419: 8919: 3608: 5259: 9423: 4990: 4013: 922: 2968: 5876: 8091:. It's beautiful art and it fits the article well; I find the opposes somewhat unreasonable, given that the point of the image is to help you understand the subject of the article, and the idea of fanfiction is that it is both art and can sometimes include art—I would consider the work to be that. If the art can be considered a work of fanfiction, I think it fits, and the notion that a character needs to be popular to have works based on it is rather unreasonable, and the notion that the example needs to be "real-world" is even more unreasonable given that it's quite literally an article about 8728: 1655: 7900:

endeavours, and yet.... they collaborated constantly. As she looked up at Commons-tan, it felt like there was... more there between them. Commons-tan reached over, unsaid words hung in the air, and Wikipe-tan leaned closer, looking down to the hand in her lap, which held a gift... the perfect image for one of her 6.8 million articles from Commons-tan's 108 mllion files. She would treasure it forever, (or at least until the next edit war waged within her, and replaced it with one that had randomly been turned black and white, but that's a conflict for a later chapter).

4958: 8930: 7635: 4700: 8504: 3820: 4419: 1099: 5620: 87: 8324: 2036: 4195: 1786: 665: 7713:- I'm torn. On the oppose end, Wikipe-tan and Commons-tan are not prominent figures in the shipping community, and being abstract idealizations of these projects, they don't have set ages that illustrate the age gap in a meaningful fashion. On the support end, we're not going to get free images of the copyrighted characters that dominate the shipping community, and frankly I love the Renoir vibes. This is a useful image... I'm just not sure that it meets the FP threshold. — 1281: 1901: 679: 3151: 1401: 7834:- It's a beautiful art piece IMO and the image is educationally useful. I'm not sure that I agree with the argument about it being "beyond the ken" of readers, since Knowledge exists to help people learn and understand subjects they may have had no prior understanding of. FP has also featured technical and scientific charts and diagrams, which I imagine are at least a little difficult for average readers to understand without further reading. 7040: 7020: 35: 675:. Displays differ greatly in their ability to show shadow detail. There are four dark grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display shadow detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the monitor and/or computer display settings. Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal shadow detail. Please take this into account when voting. 6157: 6490: 6600:(MediaWiki not transcoding HDR properly), so you'll notice the UHD source has HDR but the HD transcodes that MediaWiki produces are in SDR without a proper tonemapping. For cases like this, I'm not sure if it would be better to add a notice to the file page advising readers of the difference or do a UHD upload in SDR. It's a good transfer with encyclopedic value, so if that question can be settled, I'd support. 2243: 820: 1985:- the swaying motion is very disturbing. Was this shot from a drone or a swaying mast, and later stabilized? It is impossible to remove the swaying due to perspective change. Besides, it does not show the eclipse, just the darkening. (I once shot a similar timelapse on 16mm film, evening-night-morning, and it looked almost the same... Admittedly, the motion of the vehicles was totally different.) -- 6461: 789: 8186:"6. Is verifiable." No; using Knowledge's own mascots to illustrate this concept is, if not original research, then at least an aspect that makes the work harder to understand than it otherwise would be. Knowledge is kind of in a bind on this; an image showing two copyrighted characters the public is familiar with would showcase the concept better but wouldn't be free use. 9150: 4198: 4202: 4201: 4197: 4196: 8112:- Per my arguments above. EV is minimal when the characters are not commonly shipped (or even commonly the subject of fan fiction), as it does not represent the general landscape of the subject (not that a landscape where Barry Benson has multiple fan fictions, and "Garfield Effect" exists, can be easily summarized in one image) — 4203: 1432:; I checked the levels). I consider this acceptable is because the source image is a black-and-white engraving, a process that can't produce grays, and therefore true to how it would have appeared on the page. This is also a static GIF, so it doesn't show the compression a JPEG of the same file size would. I tracked down the 3154: 1904: 3153: 1903: 3158: 3157: 3152: 1908: 1907: 1902: 3159: 1909: 8526: 6394:

after the nom had 6 supports and zero opposition. There was consensus for it becoming FP prior to it being replaced in the article. The image was replaced with a technically subpar image and the replacement went unnoticed. If the closure was delayed a few days and the nominator had been notified, the

1535:

I wouldn't read too much into the fact that it's for sale as a stock photo; that's not uncommon for material in the public domain. The fact that I was able to trace it to a document outside of copyright should be proof enough. I'm not sure why you can't see the page I linked, though; I got it to load

9218:

It is true that the original video quality is only 240p, however I think its historical value as the first video ever uploaded to YouTube vindicates it. As far as I am aware, restoration or remastering is unnecessary since this is how the video was originally uploaded. The video was also selected as

6290:

Dramatic and interesting shot with solid EV. It would be good though if more details could be added to the caption here and at Commons, though the NASA caption is rather sparce. In particular, it appears that the B-52 is probably the aircraft that dropped the HL-10 for its flight (note the equipment

4200: 141:

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

7899:

Wikipe-tan looked up at Commons-tan, blushing slightly as they sat on the bench. They had worked together in their efforts to protect knowledge for so long, but Wikipe-tan was more of an author, and Commons-tan more of an artist, and their endeavours seemed so different. They were separate in their

6905:

have edited since alt 1 was uploaded. I would suggest (1) opening the discussion to opinions from people who haven't participated, (2) closing as consensus to promote the original and starting a procedural nomination to replace, or (3) leaving the nomination open until Vinícius O. and Hamid Hassani

653:

overwrite or remove the original. Instead, upload your edit with a different file name (e.g., add "edit" to the file name), and display it below the original nomination. Edits should be appropriately captioned in sequential order (e.g., Edit 1, Edit 2, etc), and describe the modifications that have

212:

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

7238:

to work. That is... a heck of a read, and I'm curious if Commons/Wikimedia council have explored the implications of this decision (sounds like a lot of book covers may actually be PD). My concern about copyright is quelled - aside from the brief tagline, none of the text really seems to cross the

704:

Note that on most consumer LCD displays (laptop or flat screen), viewing angle strongly affects these images. Correct adjustment on one part of the screen might be incorrect on another part for a stationary head position. Click on the images for more technical information. If possible, calibration

7220:

edition. One could argue that, if the Copyright Office holds the illustration to be public domain, the rest of the poster is, too, since it's just text and simple shapes that wouldn't be copyrightable on their own. That steers closer to original research than I think I'm comfortable with, though.

2346:

These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you

196:. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is 685:

Displays also differ greatly in their ability to show highlight detail. There are light grey circles in the adjacent image. If you can discern three (or even four) of the circles, your monitor can display highlight detail correctly. If you see fewer than three circles, you may need to adjust the

7219:

is an archived copy. This assessment from the Copyright Office seems to specifically be about the illustration of the shark and swimmer, rather than this poster as a document in and of itself; the report says that the illustration was originally published as the cover of the novel's paperback

6493: 823: 1501:- this scan looks way over-filtered - I'm pretty sure the faces on the original printed page don't look as blobby as they do here. A woodcut or engraving should be scanned at a much higher res if it is intended to be just 1-bit. (BTW: Access to the page you tracked down is not allowed...) -- 6497: 6496: 6492: 6491: 845:, which produces an improperly converted video (note the limited contrast, with light sources showing up as grey instead of nearly white) unless readers know about the issue and select "Source" playback. The replacement version has been tonemapped so it more closely resembles the original. 827: 826: 822: 821: 4204: 1591:

Oh, don't get me wrong, I'm not disputing that it is Public Domain! I'm just surprised that anyone actually would pay anything for PD material, since a reverse image search (which I used) will give you many free alternatives... I'm opposing because of the low quality of the 1-bit image.

3080:

I confess I didn't notice anything until you mentioned it. To me, the colored areas look pretty good, but I missed how it was portraying the areas around lines. I did a reverse image search just now to see if I could find a larger file copy to propose as an alt, but sadly had no luck.

3156: 1906: 6498: 828: 4217:

is a short film produced by the United States Department of War released in 1943. It has anti-racist and anti-fascist themes, and was made to educate viewers about prejudice and discrimination. The film was also made to make the case for the desegregation of the United States armed

178:

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

6464: 2844:

from Knowledge:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing

792: 696:

On a gamma-adjusted display, the four circles in the color image blend into the background when seen from a few feet (roughly 75–150 cm) away. If they do not, you could adjust the gamma setting (found in the computer's settings, not on the display), until they do. This may be

6468: 6467: 6463: 6462: 796: 795: 791: 790: 6469: 797: 9180: 6499: 829: 6766:

I don't really understand the benefit of the new version, specially the advantage of SDR for old films and black and white videos. To me, it seems to have more contrast. Is it really the case, or a side-effect? Which version is more faithful to the original film?

9275:- I've pulled the link to the archived version and confirmed that the video was under a CC-BY license on the attributed date. This is a historical artifact, with a good article on it, and a very important piece of the internet timeline. We've previously featured 9191: 9192: 6470: 798: 701:

difficult to attain, and a slight error is not detrimental. Uncorrected PC displays usually show the circles darker than the background. Note that the image must be viewed in original size (263 × 68 pixels) - if enlarged or reduced, results are not accurate.

6495: 1550:

Oh, I missed the bit about copyright being life +70 years. That may be a problem, since I genuinely cannot read the signature of the artist on the page this came from. Given that this is from 1905 at the latest, and that 70 years ago was 1954, I think it's

825: 9169: 9184: 9177: 9174: 9187: 9175: 9190: 9189: 9176: 9156: 9151: 9181: 9162: 9157: 9170: 9165: 9159: 9185: 9183: 9163: 9161: 9160: 9155: 9188: 9182: 9178: 9168: 9167: 9166: 101:

to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on

9164: 9158: 9179: 9153: 9186: 9173: 9172: 9171: 6466: 794: 8242:. The drawing itself are very well done in my opinion however i don't think it suits well with the Knowledge article (it does help me imagining it but doesn't made it easier to understand). What about Picture of the day on Wikimedia Commons? 1638: 6800:

The "Source" playback on the original file can be used as a reference. That's in HDR, and if you have a display that properly handles HDR, there'll be a big difference between that and the default "HD 1080p" SDR playback (on that or on

4726:

High-resolution of a painting depicting a major event in religious history. A Google search for this painting turns up results with color grading that's all over the place; this copy is from The Jewish Museum's website, and Google says

7239:

threshold of originality for the United States, and the illustration is free. Still have a question about the format; since the original was a JPG, being PNG only prevents loss during re-use. A JPG would render better on Knowledge. —

6618:). I'd like to ask for the nomination to be suspended until I can get the alt uploaded, so we avoid having to go through a delist-and-replace nomination after this closes. If anyone here's an admin on Commons and can speedy delete 1611:}} if the image was made in the 1890s and C.E. Jensen wasn't the original author. And then if the author is identified and it turns out to still be under copyright in the EU, then we transfer it to enwiki like Chris Woodrich said. 521:

Recommendations added early in the process may be disregarded if they do not address concerns and/or improvements that arise later in the debate. Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and update their votes

6956:

Yeah. If we close this one then we can give it another go-around with just the alt and I think it'll pass. I don't know how long these things are normally left open, but we're coming up on a month since this nomination was made.

4887: 2527:". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use " 2579:

from Knowledge:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from

1440:- and, while I don't think this specific scan is where this copy originated, it does confirm the image's provenance. Lastly, the picture is a bit under 1500px on the short axis, something I hope will be forgiven given its age. 7675: 1464: 6781:

I second this uncertainty. While I can see that the alt has slightly higher contrast, the difference between the two is so slight that I don't feel qualified to say what standards should be used to decide which is superior.

208:

If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance.

7874:

This doesn't seem to illustrate the concept well given that it appears to be a fan fiction thing, and I don't think that anyone is writing fan fiction about thse obscure representations of Knowledge and Wikimedia Commons.

3182:, a 3D fractal. Already featured on Commons and the Persian Knowledge. The video is slightly brighter at the very top and bottom of the frame and I'm not sure why, but otherwise I see no deficiencies. We do already have a 8167:"1. Is of a high technical standard." In terms of portraiture, this shows well-developed skill, but it's very low contrast in places. I downloaded a copy and grayscaled it; it doesn't read well at all that way. Ambiguous. 5073:

Levels are way off. Even the simplest "Put the brightest red point to 255, darkest to 0, and so on with green and blue, and then do a midpoint and blackpoint can vastly improve it. It's like a film over it gets removed.

1936:, Canada. The traffic flow shows the short time scale, i.e. minutes, not hours. The brightness of the sky at horizon shows the unnatural nature of the event. There is slight camera movement, but not too distracting IMO. 9154: 2998:

includes a test pattern for calibration (as does the first Wikimedia upload, since cropped), so I believe these colors are faithful and the uniform browning is simply an aspect of the paper's age (contrast it against

4199: 6796:

I agree with Yann that it'd be better to show it in HDR than to not. That said, what's happening is most people will never see an HDR video on Knowledge because they'll use the default playback, which is always in

6254:

A tiny number of dust specks in the shadows really don't hold back much. Good quality for colour film of the era (I've seen better indoor shots with colour film of the era, but outdoor shots with moving objects?).

7732:– Perhaps it is a personal failure with recognizing emotion in art, but I could not discern that this was meant to be a romantic context without the caption. Even so, I'm not going to vote yes or no on this one. ― 3395: 1769: 1423:

Satirical cartoon with a lot of character, depicting "women's emancipation" by way of smoking. Portrayed here as an inversion of gender roles, this challenge to social norms was framed as liberating by the

3003:

when it was new). I know some people here have well-developed opinions about what image margins should look like; these look okay to me, but I'd also support alternate versions if they're a sticking point.

3919:— Not visually grabbing, but I suppose that's the curse of trying to photograph a small animal that's evolved to blend in with its environment. The composition is excellent, though; overall, I'm neutral. 7132:. It's a classic and iconic poster from one of the most famous American films. The file is indeed in the public domain, which was affirmed by the US Copyright Office, so no IP issues should be present. 133:

list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-thirds majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of

9513:

per my comment from the previous nomination - this is a great photo that illustrates several aspects of the subject's life and is also useful for articles on the relationships between humans and dogs.

8589:- Was honestly going to nominate this, until I saw that you were still actively working on it. It's an excellent image, showing her at work on something that was important to her during the period. — 3155: 2257:

This is one of the first images taken at Machu Picchu during the Yale Peruvian Expedition of 1912, following the clearing work. It may be the first published photo of the classic view of Machu Picchu.

1905: 8201:; this is a well-made image, but the concept it's trying to illustrate is complex and innately tied to the world of copyright in ways that are hard to work around. I don't think it's FP quality. 6494: 824: 1117:

Good photo of the entrance to the Pan-Pacific Auditorium, since destroyed by fire, taken either shortly before or after it closed in the 1970s. I believe this is the best photo we have of it;

9445:. I've added a bit of a blurb on the viral image, and found a higher resolution presentation that was Tweeted by NASA, so all of the criticisms from the first nomination should be dealt with. 9399: 9237: 7076: 6537: 4248: 8247: 1428:

marketing campaign, the article for which is a very entertaining read. The file appears to be 1-bit color, which is to say that every pixel appears either white or black (although it's not

7418:

Alright, I added new layers with the three primary colours (red, black, white) and set them at 75% opacity. That has taken care of the artifacting in the wordmark (in both instances). —

7235: 9442: 6465: 1882: 1809: 793: 6906:

have a chance to weigh in. Otherwise we're stuck presenting (and featuring!) an encoding error for procedural reasons around when the file was uploaded, which I think should be avoided.

686:

monitor and/or computer display settings (probably reduce the contrast setting). Some displays cannot be adjusted for ideal highlight detail. Please take this into account when voting.

486:

If your concern is one that can only be addressed by the creator, and if they haven't nominated or commented on the image, and if they are a Wikipedian, you should notify them directly.

1472:

The signature on the source page is unreadable to me (and doesn't seem to match the name "A. Guillaume" at the bottom); the book itself is by C.E. Jensen. Image uploaded to Commons by

5852: 6370:. though it is indeed larger, its quality is worse, and it's full of jpeg artifacts. I restored the nominated photo in the articles, and given 8 supports I think it can be promoted. 4517:

This is rather lacking in wow factor (a photo taken while a tram was passing through would have added a bit more interest and EV, for example), but has good EV and is well executed.

5269:, also known as the "Wooden Wonder", was a wood-framed multi-role aircraft introduced by the British during World War II. It was one of the fastest operational aircraft at the time. 4676: 3030: 2017: 4552:

Got one such tram/roundabout intersection 800 meters from my home: see Google maps at 60°12'49.9"N 24°53'02.8"E (direct Google link prohibited...) - but it is not as good looking.

7611: 1382: 197: 4171: 2583:

If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.

9152: 8529:. Downside: Not the lead image, and the article has many of her, but I think the manuscript helps a lot with EV, as it gives it something unique compared to the other photos. 3584: 2944: 2543:)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use " 1667: 690: 3460:

Unknown photographer from the Auschwitz Erkennungsdienst. Several sources believe the photographer to have been SS officers Ernst Hoffmann or Bernhard Walter, restored by

3394: 1080: 771: 8183:"5. Adds significant encyclopedic value to an article." I'm doubtful of this; if anything, I think you need to read the article to understand what the picture is showing. 1536:

just fine on multiple browsers, one of which (Safari) has no add-ons. The only thing I can think is that it's blocked in whatever area you are. I'm in the United States.

7362:

version has more jpeg artifacts, see the red "JAWS" text area. Easy to see at an enlargment of 150%. Can you reconvert using a larger file size and/or zero compression?

6809:, so it looks least like the film. With alt 1, the source file had the tonemapping applied when I converted it from HDR, so the transcodes will look more like the film. 6367: 5235: 903: 5532:

This image doesn't look very realistic. It appears to be a highly stylized or edited representation rather than a true-to-life photograph of the De Havilland Mosquito.

9463: 4968:

in 1985; this Japan-born American and British actress had a career that spanned from 1935 through 1988, and included two Academy Awards. She appeared in such films as

3127: 2224: 1682: 948:

Excellent example of the artist's style, highlighting the high levels of realism and the lighting techniques that he developed after studying Western and Japanese art.

309: 8173:"3. Is among Knowledge's best work." That's broad, but "It illustrates the subject in a compelling way, making the viewer want to know more" is better. I guess this 6437: 4934: 2995: 859: 5596: 415:

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

8300: 7445: 7295: 6928:

If the current consensus doesn't change and the Original is promoted, then you or anyone can start a "Delist and Replace" nomination to get consensus for Alt 1.

6732: 6577: 6556: 4907: 3860: 3540: 8544: 6993: 2114: 122:

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

3796: 1262: 8189:"7. Has a descriptive, informative and complete file description in English." While the current description could be more detailed, I think it's sufficient. 86: 6614:

I have an alt I'd like to add, but unfortunately I've been trying to upload it since Saturday and gotten nothing but upload errors (seems to be because of

6133: 4790:- resolution is a bit smaller than many of our painting FPs, but given that this work is smaller (less than a foot on the long side), it's fine for me. — 3989: 2643: 1950: 319: 147: 9640:

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

183:

Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated.

9126: 8480: 4395: 5551:

High quality photo of this important aircraft type. The fact that it depicts an aircraft serving with a front line combat unit adds strongly to the EV.

2341: 8895: 8704: 6046: 6025: 5533: 5160: 4649: 4534:– The sharpness on the right corners is subpar. It's an interesting intersection. The first time I see a roundabout with rail tracks going through it! 966: 4808: 1559:. I'm not going to withdraw this immediately, though; perhaps someone else will have an insight that gives us a definite answer one way or the other. 8197:

By my count, this picture passes on points 2, 4 and 7; is marginal on points 1 and 3; fails points 5 and 6; and point 8 doesn't apply. I have to say

3578: 2901: 2695:

Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.

4810: 6802: 5018: 3452: 3200: 770: 8525:

The best picture from this period of her life, and includes the manuscript of her autobiography, which is helpful. Composition is way better than

9398: 8257: 7683: 7216: 7195: 6584: 3667: 3480: 2076: 1140: 9657: 8947: 7303: 6942:

Yeah, I was hoping to avoid having to make everyone go through a separate nomination but it looks like that might end up being the best route.

3000: 621: 6725: 4858:

a painting, its EV (judging from the articles in which it is used) is as an illustration of the event, not as a reproduction of the painting.

8757: 7141: 5851: 5656: 4851: 4754: 4042: 3009: 1314: 8279: 8138: 8104: 7843: 7199: 3244: 9488: 7592: 7558: 7515: 7181: 6708: 4675: 4467: 3362: 3183: 8232: 8071: 7866: 7744: 7321: 7211: 6674: 5445: 4915: 891: 9652: 9380: 8685: 8356: 8121: 8039: 7978: 7958: 7935: 7761: 7722: 7705: 7610: 7540: 6757: 5577: 5204: 5111: 2464: 2068: 1881: 314: 155: 9630: 9586: 9546: 9288: 8598: 8441: 8405: 7787: 7471: 6892: 6033: 5469: 5420: 5382: 5364: 5137: 5089: 4500:- I note the distortion caused by the wide-angle lens, but overall this is excellent for showing the scale and layout of the square. — 4376: 9319: 8210: 8155: 7427: 6619: 5733: 5541: 5400: 5065: 4842: 4325: 3315: 2937: 2271: 1977: 1835: 1050: 9305: 9083: 8615: 7371: 7338: 6609: 6127: 5525: 5507: 4782: 4305: 2932:

Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do

2132: 9505: 8965: 7276: 7262: 7248: 7229: 6691: 6334: 6317: 5912: 5486: 5168: 5154: 4928: 4799: 3852: 3760: 3548: 3261: 3104: 3090: 3075: 1869: 1768: 1742: 1586: 1493: 1204: 1190: 9600: 8294: 7884: 7497: 7350: 6270: 6163:– NASA research pilot Bill Dana takes a moment to watch NASA's NB-52B cruise overhead after a research flight in the Northrop HL-10. 4359: 4152: 423: 8649: 8083: 8015: 7995: 7915: 7809: 7409: 7389: 7124: 6640:. It's identical to the original nomination except for the color space, so the playback should have more sensible contrast levels. 6190: 6097: 6074: 5934: 5833: 5341: 5291: 5187: 4881: 4867: 4624: 4451: 4135: 3936:– Agree with previous. Lack of contrast may interest ornithologists, but detracts from visual accessibility for general readers. – 3743: 3583: 3374: 2943: 2936:

add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at

2327: 2161: 2016: 1568: 9522: 9107: 9046: 9009: 8876: 8852: 8661: 7158: 6366:

hey, I was offline for a ~week, and had no chance to response. the photo was switched during the nomination with a larger version

6017: 5975: 5778: 5560: 5324: 4894: 4342: 3777: 3565: 3058: 2090: 1708: 993: 940:, which combined Chinese, Japanese, and western approaches to painting, Gao was particularly renowned for his depictions of tigers 9356: 9276: 9026: 8796: 8632: 8417: 7826: 6564: 6430: 6361: 6246: 6054: 5951: 5799: 5711: 5695: 5216: 4825: 4657: 4509: 4236: 4081: 3982: 3891: 3790: 3709: 3352: 3298: 3121: 2217: 2107: 2010: 1852: 1725: 1600: 1381: 1173: 1023:

Might be worth doing a side-by-side. Gao Jianfu seems to have been more prominent. I'd need to see if Chen's works are PD too. —

9617: 9566: 9336: 8461: 7107: 6407: 6379: 5048: 4288: 3692: 3514: 2994:

Unusual media reflecting an unusual problem: A 19th century technical watercolor of a smashed vase prior to reconstruction. The

2881:. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line 2623:. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line 1759: 1375: 1073: 1032: 1014: 8889: 8813: 8703: 6966: 6836: 6818: 6114: 5816: 5590: 5234: 5159:

I think that the original is not bad, but the edited version is much brighter and clearer. It has a better quality altogether.

4492: 3959: 3928: 3281: 3227: 2863:. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture. 2731:

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

1620: 1545: 1509: 8383: 6791: 6300: 4638: 3497: 3389: 3335: 1573:

That can be solved with a local upload; EN-Wiki only requires a work to be free in the United States. I've done it before for

1358: 1255: 1232: 1218: 1195:

I don't trust my editing skills well enough to attempt a restoration myself, but if someone else is willing, I'd be grateful.

8734:– La Promenade is an oil on canvas, early Impressionist painting by the French artist Pierre-Auguste Renoir, created in 1870. 6951: 6937: 6915: 6776: 6637: 6282: 5754: 5229: 4599: 4582: 4564: 4543: 4272: 4098: 3126: 2310: 2298: 2200: 1993: 745: 448: 401: 9279:, which was in its native resolution, so there is precedent for resolutions lower than "minimum" for works such as this. — 8779: 5846: 4526: 4170: 3531: 9267: 8581: 8474: 6653: 6631: 4933: 4389: 3726: 1637: 1608: 1530: 336: 188:

For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the

9066: 8830: 7605: 7191:

1) Given Mediawiki's difficulty rendering PNG, is that the best format for this file? EDIT: I note that the source is jpg.

5995: 4118: 3911: 6987: 5678: 5595: 3972: 3945: 3418: 1079: 299: 107: 6420: 6349: 4165: 9393: 8698: 8299: 6215: 6105:: There's moderate sexual dimorphism, so the sex should really be identified in the caption (here and in the article). 4670: 2860: 2780: 2488: 2183: 902: 326: 3874: 3655: 6992: 4064: 2223: 1341: 539:

on this page. The thumbnail links to the image description page which, in turn, links to the high-resolution version.

280: 8918: 8177:. The most I can say is that it doesn't look like the other images I've seen cycle through Today's Featured Picture. 4475: 6436: 5436:. Deserving lead image for its article, and being in action in wartime makes up for any minor film imperfections. — 3795: 1574: 9120: 6390:, it might be good to revisit the timeline of this nomination and reconsider it's closure. The image was switched 3607: 484:

All objections should be accompanied by a specific rationale that, if addressed, would make you support the image.

6132: 4256: 3988: 3186:, but I believe this is artistically distinct enough to stand alongside it, as it does on the mandelbulb article. 2338:

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

8243: 7488:

page say: "Reviewers are advised to monitor the progress of a nomination and 'update their votes' accordingly."

5145:

Technical precision aside, the original was already quite good; I had to fullscreen them to see the difference.

4573:

Interesting. I figure the rail tracks were there first, and years later the roundabouts were built around them.

716: 9422: 9125: 8987: 8479: 7055: 5686:- Excellent technical quality, though an article on the statue would cement its EV better than we have now. — 4982: 4394: 2927: 1942: 1929: 7851:

I believe it's somewhat using Japanese artistic tropes to dshow the relationship, which suits the characters.

4591:

Nope, exactly the other way around, the tracks are just a couple of years old, for a new rapid tram line... --

3953:. Shows the bird's coloration in relation to its natural habitat. Why wouldn't that interest general readers? 106:

should illustrate a Knowledge article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the

7657:", a concept somewhat difficult to illustrate through CC! My friend drew this image on my suggestion for the 5258: 2113: 1131: 17: 7253:

Oh, I guess I linked the original instead of the archived copy I was reading. Sorry you had to go digging.

7054:

High-resolution upload of the iconic film poster for one of the most popular American films, which was the

6396: 6391: 5900: 3240: 1261: 331: 8192:"8. Avoids inappropriate digital manipulation." The image is natively digital; I don't think this applies. 6045:

The image has very good quality and it captures a clear view on the Black-throated green warbler species.

1121:

from the 1950s shows it during its heyday, but I think the angle is too steep to do justice to the facade.

841:

Opening this based on the discussion in the previous nomination. The currently listed file is impacted by

4989: 2856: 2848:

Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version.

2776: 2559: 2503: 2060: 1450: 274: 264: 193: 175: 130: 103: 1433: 9079: 7299: 6581: 6560: 4911: 4012: 3544: 2788:

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

2347:

voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.

257: 6753:

An alternative was added to the nomination. Could you indicate which version(s) you support? Regards,

125:

For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the

8894: 8025:

It seems the image of a fictional relationship that causes controversy has itself caused controversy.

5004:

High technical quality; captures the actress in the twilight years of her career; featured on Commons

4970: 3021: 2983: 2356: 1118: 671:

In a discussion about the brightness of an image, it is necessary to know if the computer display is

287: 151:

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

8946:

Unanimously featured on Commons. Headline image. The image has undergone noise reduction since the

8134: 8100: 7839: 7553: 7511: 7137: 7102: 5883: 5441: 4148: 3619: 2967: 1455: 269: 626:

when you encounter acronyms or jargon in other voters' comments. You can also link to it by using

8160:

I was confused by this one, and decided to go through the criteria list to do things by the book.

7700: 6721: 6330: 6313: 6093: 5829: 5573: 5200: 4838: 4648:- This picture is very accurate since It is real and it is possible to see the square from above 4620: 4372: 4131: 3756: 3651: 3638: 3561: 3443: 3311: 3236: 3208: 2398: 1555:

the author (who could be reasonably assumed to be at least 20 in 1905) was dead by then, but not

921: 135: 34: 6704: 3773: 2940:. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed. 2813:

put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.

2755:

put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.

2717:

put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.

2452:

put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.

2386:

put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.

2249:– Machu Picchu taken by Hiram Bingham III in 1912 after major clearing work had been undertaken. 344: 158:

to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Knowledge but on all other

9582: 9540: 9374: 9263: 9101: 9042: 8870: 8679: 8435: 8228: 8065: 8035: 7931: 7757: 7740: 7586: 7534: 5969: 5772: 5463: 5131: 4321: 3659: 3095:

Same, and the British Museum is now saying that they don't have a digital copy of the image. —

1127: 1106: 765: 439: 6356:

While there’s a clear consensus to promotion, an unused image can’t become a featured picture.

4019:– The Finsteraarhorn (aerial view from the south) is the highest mountain of the Bernese Alps. 2852:

replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.

2333: 649:

If you feel you could improve a candidate by image editing, please feel free to do so, but do

532: 389:

for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g.,

9484: 9284: 9075: 9022: 8973: 8792: 8765: 8748: 8594: 8379: 8117: 7783: 7718: 7423: 7385: 7317: 7272: 7244: 7207: 6050: 6029: 5947: 5875: 5795: 5729: 5707: 5691: 5537: 5521: 5396: 5378: 5320: 5304: 5283: 5266: 5164: 5061: 5044: 4795: 4707: 4653: 4505: 4301: 4240: 4077: 3887: 3739: 3510: 3370: 3257: 3100: 3071: 2323: 2213: 2103: 1933: 1917: 1865: 1738: 1582: 1371: 1186: 1046: 1028: 989: 7380:

This is the version directly from the source. I can see if Photoshop can clear it a bit. —

2682:

it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.

2042:– Female European spruce bark beetle (Ips typographus). Adults are usually 4.0–5.5 mm long. 225:

it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article(s).

9314: 8253: 7642: 5503: 4872:

I'd be game for that, but I'm not sure which category it would best suit. Any suggestions?

4737: 4711: 4267: 2920: 2662: 1654: 738: 159: 2669: 8: 9501: 9301: 8809: 8727: 8611: 8364: 8206: 8151: 8130: 8096: 7835: 7546: 7507: 7441: 7433: 7258: 7225: 7133: 7095: 6962: 6832: 6787: 6670: 6597: 6242: 6228: 6110: 5920: 5812: 5482: 5437: 5150: 5010: 4965: 4877: 4863: 4778: 4728: 4488: 4355: 4144: 4050: 3924: 3827: 3705: 3493: 3223: 3086: 3054: 3039: 2476: 2006: 1958: 1564: 1541: 1489: 1354: 1228: 1200: 1169: 1041:

Alright, made a triptych to better display examples of works by the school's founders. —

189: 126: 8929: 8334:

in the Brooklyn Botanic Garden. The species is one of few dragonflies that mimics wasps.

7634: 6061:

I struck the above votes. Editor has less than 100 edits. See instruction on top of the

4888:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Religion and mythology

4226:

I nominated this before years ago and it almost was promoted so I'm nominating it again.

3572:

Promoted File:Selection on the ramp at Auschwitz-Birkenau, 1944 (Auschwitz Album) 1b.jpg

2433:

Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:

527:

Prior to giving an opinion, the image should be assessed on its quality as displayed at

9598: 7696: 7676:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle

7667: 7658: 7654: 6902: 6748: 6717: 6326: 6309: 6089: 5825: 5787: 5717: 5644: 5569: 5373:

I'll have a looksie in a bit. Doing a bit of writing - finally got some inspiration —

5196: 4834: 4636: 4616: 4368: 4232: 4213: 4127: 3752: 3557: 3307: 2975: 1465:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Culture and lifestyle

1446: 1425: 1412: 247: 240: 232: 6898: 6744: 6700: 5720:

now – once I got the Mandarin title, wasn't too hard to get some sources. I note that

3769: 418: 396: 9576: 9532: 9366: 9257: 9093: 9036: 8997: 8862: 8840: 8671: 8569: 8556: 8427: 8393: 8348: 8331: 8222: 8057: 8029: 8003: 7966: 7946: 7925: 7903: 7854: 7751: 7734: 7578: 7526: 7493: 7459: 7453: 7405: 7367: 7334: 7169: 6933: 6888: 6403: 6375: 6258: 6211: 6070: 6005: 5961: 5764: 5750: 5455: 5408: 5352: 5337: 5183: 5123: 5099: 5077: 4957: 4821: 4715: 4699: 4578: 4539: 4338: 4315: 4094: 3688: 3527: 3348: 3294: 2294: 2279: 2196: 1973: 1848: 1721: 1415:

ad campaign, in which smoking was framed as a liberating and equalizing act by women.

1305: 1149: 672: 630: 9635: 5405:

Looks good. It's an in-air photo from the 40s, so that forgives a lot of filmgrain.

2568:

and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.

510:

If you think a nominated image obviously fails the featured picture criteria, write

9518: 9480: 9451: 9430: 9280: 9114:

Promoted File:Rufa red knot (Calidris canutus rufa) in Delaware Bay, New Jersey.jpg

9018: 8788: 8645: 8590: 8503: 8375: 8113: 7991: 7880: 7779: 7714: 7419: 7381: 7355: 7313: 7268: 7240: 7203: 6478: 6296: 5943: 5791: 5725: 5703: 5687: 5556: 5517: 5495: 5392: 5374: 5316: 5300: 5057: 5040: 4791: 4741: 4522: 4501: 4297: 4073: 3883: 3819: 3735: 3642: 3615: 3506: 3366: 3253: 3096: 3067: 3017: 2319: 2209: 2169: 2153: 2099: 1861: 1755: 1734: 1578: 1367: 1182: 1042: 1024: 985: 808: 425: 202:

If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it

185:

The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture.

154:

If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at

9433:

poses with his two rescue dogs, Jake and Scout, 2009; the image went viral in 2015

6615: 6512: 6508: 4418: 1411:

courts a shy, effeminate man. This challenge to gender roles was exploited by the

1098: 842: 90:

This star, with one point broken, symbolizes the featured candidates on Knowledge.

8552: 7806: 6947: 6911: 6864: 6814: 6649: 6627: 6605: 6596:

I was the uploader on this one. It's worth noting that this video is impacted by

6529: 6181: 5619: 5499: 5026: 4763: 4596: 4561: 4471: 4459: 4285: 3844: 3439: 3278: 1990: 1616: 1597: 1527: 1506: 1301: 887: 871: 851: 803: 605: 365: 7749:

If anything, this image deserves a "most contested FP nomination" of the year. ―

4072:- Seems slightly oversharpened, but not to the point of haloing, so I'm good. — 3066:- JPG artifacting is pretty bad, as expected at 300 kb for a file this size. — 9613: 9562: 9497: 9352: 9297: 9062: 8826: 8805: 8628: 8607: 8457: 8202: 8147: 7254: 7221: 7120: 6958: 6828: 6783: 6772: 6736: 6687: 6666: 6238: 6224: 6177: 6106: 5991: 5808: 5626:– The Fisher Girl Statue is a landmark statue in the city of Zhuhai, Guangdong. 5478: 5146: 4873: 4859: 4813: 4774: 4745: 4484: 4351: 4114: 4033: 3954: 3920: 3907: 3701: 3626: 3489: 3476: 3343:– This is the first successful FP nom in the mathematics category in 12 years! 3331: 3219: 3082: 3050: 2002: 1830: 1817: 1703: 1690: 1560: 1537: 1485: 1350: 1337: 1322: 1251: 1224: 1214: 1196: 1165: 1069: 1010: 1002: 958: 937: 609: 9624:

Promoted File:NASA astronaut Leland D. Melvin with his dogs Jake and Scout.jpg

1522:

for 20€ on a stock image site... (In Denmark, copyright is life +70 years.) --

514:

followed by your reasons. Nominations may be closed early if this is the case.

421: 399: 9646: 9627: 9595: 9390: 9332: 9225: 9200: 9117: 8886: 8695: 8535: 8511: 8471: 8291: 8276: 8272: 7983: 7822: 7778:

was similar, over a decade back (and the Commons nom was also contentious) —

7602: 7485: 7154: 6984: 6874: 6754: 6427: 6417: 6387: 6358: 6346: 6124: 6062: 5843: 5587: 5226: 4976: 4925: 4891: 4667: 4633: 4439: 4386: 4162: 3979: 3969: 3941: 3787: 3722: 3575: 3386: 3118: 3013: 2979: 2855:

Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of

1785: 613: 8323: 6805:, for example). With the transcodes on the original, there's no tonemapping 5584:

Promoted File:De Havilland DH.98 Mosquito B Mk IV Series 2 (restoration).jpg

2553:". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages. 2407:

on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.

2350: 403: 61: 9455: 9003: 8846: 8575: 8399: 8009: 7972: 7952: 7909: 7860: 7489: 7465: 7401: 7363: 7330: 7175: 7084: 7068: 7033: 6929: 6884: 6545: 6482: 6399: 6371: 6264: 6207: 6066: 6011: 5746: 5702:

I do see that there is enough for a stub in the Zhuhai article already. —

5414: 5358: 5333: 5179: 5105: 5083: 4817: 4574: 4535: 4334: 4090: 3684: 3523: 3344: 3290: 2290: 2263: 2192: 2035: 1969: 1844: 1717: 812: 664: 584:

instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.

497:

instead, so that your opinion will be weighed as half of a "full" opinion.

420: 398: 8271:

this vote. Editor has less than 100 edits. See instructions on top of the

9514: 9245: 9229: 9208: 8641: 7987: 7891: 7876: 7064: 7028: 6292: 5552: 5277:

Excellent image of a remarkable aircraft; fantastic quality for 1942/1943

4518: 3784:

Promoted File:NASA’s Boeing Crew Flight Test Launch (NHQ202406050029).jpg

2594:

page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.

1751: 1473: 5223:

Promoted File:Olivia de Havilland, actress, 1985 - levels adjustment.jpg

4443: 2605:

page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.

1607:

It shouldn't be an issue at all. The licensing tag should probably be {{

1280: 368:. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations. 8984: 8776: 8658: 8414: 8080: 7802: 7347: 6943: 6907: 6878: 6810: 6645: 6623: 6601: 6279: 5931: 5675: 5213: 4592: 4557: 4281: 4061: 3871: 3274: 3192: 3179: 3167: 2307: 2180: 2087: 1986: 1612: 1593: 1523: 1502: 974: 954: 933: 883: 867: 678: 9238:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film

7077:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film

6538:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film

4762:

Painted by Jacques Joseph Tissot, this version uploaded to Commons by

4249:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Film

4159:

Promoted File:Aerial image of Finsteraarhorn (view from the south).jpg

1400: 9609: 9556: 9346: 9056: 8822: 8624: 8451: 7920: 7437: 7116: 6768: 6740: 6683: 6398:). If it's possible, you may want to reconsider the closure. Cheers. 5985: 5904: 5664: 5498:, do we know what location the plane is flying over in this photo? — 4108: 3901: 3472: 3461: 3365:, but still... that's a long time! Good to have some new material. — 3325: 2816:

Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.

1408: 1333: 1247: 1210: 1153: 1065: 1006: 7202:

has a clear copyright notice. How sure are we that this is free? —

7039: 7019: 4383:

Promoted File:Don't Be a Sucker (high resolution 35mm transfer).webm

3270: 1810:

Knowledge:Featured picture candidates/Canada goose reflection 03.jpg

1666:

Currently unused. We have an FP of a male; none of a female, though

9328: 8956: 7818: 7449: 7150: 3937: 3718: 2470:

newest on top, remove the oldest so that 15 are listed at all times

6897:

Voting stopped <24 hours after alt 1 was uploaded, and neither

6395:

nominator would have caught up with it (as they did on August 2nd

5349:

A few bright specks upper left, but nothing above filmgrain size.

2355:

A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks:

1797:

Currently unused. We have many images of this very common species.

447: 9204: 7774:

User-generated art tends to get controversial. The lead image at

6156: 3031:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Diagrams

2690:

the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:

2550: 2545: 2536: 2532: 2524: 2520: 2043: 9327:– Purported significance not apparent. Odd content, lacks EV. – 7942:

Proving Nick-D a horrible liar who should be ashamed of himself.

569:

if you believe the image should be replaced by a better picture.

482:, followed by your reasoning, if you disapprove of the picture. 6827:

too, if that's what it takes to get this over the finish line.

5745:– very nice photo and the article has a section on the statue. 5721: 5648: 5640: 2540: 2242: 2139:– Arc-eye hawkfish (Paracirrhites arcatus), Zanzibar, Tanzania. 1518:

Interestingly, "publication right" for this very image is also

8129:. Too in-universe to be easily understood or representative. — 7166:

It's not the best reproduction, but it's good enough for now.

3425:– Selection on the ramp at Auschwitz-Birkenau, Auschwitz Album 2571:

Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using

8024: 4812:

archive links should be added next to the dead source links,

4807:– but the two source links on the image page are dead. These 2840:(replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the 1668:

File:Common Blackbird (Turdus merula mauritanicus) female.jpg

7940:

And now someone has written romantic fanfiction about them.

6121:

Promoted File:Black-throated green warbler in PP (14050).jpg

3978:

Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion.

2575:(replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the 689: 7941: 7775: 6368:

File:HL-10 on Lakebed with B-52 flyby - GPN-2000-000201.jpg

9464:

Knowledge:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering

7645:

sitting on a bench in a park, posed in a romantic context.

3383:

Promoted File:Visit of the Mandelbulb (4K UHD; 50FPS).webm

1683:

Knowledge:Featured picture candidates/Turdus Merula female

1181:- I see hairs, dust. Could use some light restoration. — 419: 397: 860:

Knowledge:Featured picture candidates/His Girl Friday (2)

8883:

Promoted File:La Promenade, by Pierre-Auguste Renoir.jpg

8742:

Good reproduction of a painting with a specific article.

8079:- I agree with NickD. This is not a real-world example. 5894:

Unanimously featured on Commons in June. Headline image.

2515:

The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "

391:

Knowledge:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever

9407: