This page uses content from Wikipedia and is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates

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

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

Promoting an image

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

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

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

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

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

Delisting an image

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

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

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

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

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

Featured content:

Featured picture tools:

Step 1:
Evaluate

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

Step 2:
Create a subpage
For Nominations

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


For Delists (or Delist & Replace)

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


Step 3:
Transclude and link

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

How to comment for Candidate Images

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

How to comment for Delist Images

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

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

Editing candidates

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

Is my monitor adjusted correctly?

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

Current nominations

Set: Turgot map of Paris

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 20:08:02 (UTC)

Original – The Turgot map of Paris (full map) WARNING: 850 MB!
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 1 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 2 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 3 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 4 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 5 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 6 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 7 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 8 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 9 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 10 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 11 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 12 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 13 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 14 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 15 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 16 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 17 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 18-19 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Turgot map of Paris, sheet 20 - Norman B. Leventhal Map Center.jpg
Reason
Highly detailed reproduction of this historic map. Featured on Commons. This is a set nomination. The full image and all 20 individual plates above (20 images altogether) are all nominated.
Articles in which this image appears
Turgot map of Paris
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Maps
Creator
Michel-Étienne Turgot
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 20:08, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Not visually accessible to Main Page readers. Useful as a historical document only. Sca (talk) 14:48, 16 November 2018 (UTC)



Julia Shaw

Voting period ends on 24 Nov 2018 at 10:54:22 (UTC)

Original – German-Canadian psychologist Julia Shaw, photographed in March 2018
Alternative 1 - not cropped
Alternative 2 – CSS image crop
Alternative 2 – CSS image crop
Reason
This crop of File:Julia Shaw 2018-03-10.jpg is the lead image in the article Julia Shaw (psychologist). The original image has been released through the OTRS and is of a high quality, so I believe this meets the FP criteria.
Articles in which this image appears
Julia Shaw (psychologist)
FP category for this image
People/Science and engineering
Creator
Boris Breuer; cropped by Kmhkmh
  • Support as nominator – A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 10:54, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment The crop is uneven, her right shoulder is chopped off. Brandmeistertalk 11:48, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Perhaps a more even crop could be extracted from the original image (I wouldn't really know how to do that well enough). A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 12:45, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
Personally I prefer a cropped version including the completely hair, but tastes differ. I can create another crop including both shoulders, if that is of any concern. My goal is/was simply to provide a better thumbbnail of her face (in the associated articles I created). The crop is basically just a cut & paste job with Gimp. I have no real opinion on the nomination. Personally if anything I'd rather nominate the original rather than this crop or similar derivatives. But i'm not familiar with the nomination criteria or goals.--Kmhkmh (talk) 16:40, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
I added the original. It will be considered alongside the crop. That said, I agree with Brandmeister's point. MER-C 20:12, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I added Alternate 2, a temporary crop (CSS image crop). If it gets enough support then a permanent crop can be uploaded by the nominator or Kmhkmh. Support Alternate 2 or other similar crops. Bammesk (talk) 02:32, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
That's fine as crop for commons, for the wikipedia articles however I prefer picture that focuses more on the face, which is more common/useful for biographic article imho. So in this case only the torso above her hands.--Kmhkmh (talk) 05:17, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
I edited the CSS crop to that extent. Revert if undesired. MER-C 10:19, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
I didn't see that in time, meanwhile I've aleady replaced the pictures in the articles by another crop more or less the same as yours.--Kmhkmh (talk) 15:44, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
already uploaded
  • Support alternative 2, but would also support the rest of the body. Brandmeistertalk 10:11, 16 November 2018 (UTC)



Delist: Saint Vitus Cathedral

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 12:59:08 (UTC)

landscape
Reason
Not used in any articles, low resolution, not up to modern standards re: interiors.
Articles this image appears in
None
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/St Vitus stained glass
Nominator
MER-C
  • DelistMER-C 12:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist – Substandard image. Sca (talk) 14:57, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist - Well below current standards. Mattximus (talk) 03:33, 14 November 2018 (UTC)



Europa

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 02:58:09 (UTC)

Original (3,680 × 2,720 pixels) – Realistic-color Galileo mosaic of Europa's anti-Jovian hemisphere showing numerous lineae
Alternative 1 (2,300 × 1,700 pixels)
Reason
High resolution, FP on Commons, good EV
Articles in which this image appears
Europa (moon), Galileo (spacecraft), etc.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
NASA / Jet Propulsion Lab-Caltech / SETI Institute, uploaded by WolfmanSF
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 02:58, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – upsampled. I would support an upload from the original TIFF (second revision of this file). MER-C 09:36, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
    Support alternative – I have uploaded the said revision, which has not undergone additional upsampling and sharpening. MER-C 13:11, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support as uploader – It was upsampled because the image's fine detail is difficult to appreciate in the smaller version (without putting your nose up to the monitor, that is – check out, for example, the ridges near the terminator). An image such as this would have gone through many types of processing and manipulation before being released, so the suggestion that we shouldn't edit it further makes little sense. WolfmanSF (talk) 20:28, 14 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support both, prefer Alternate 1. Whichever is stable in the article is Ok with me. Bammesk (talk) 02:06, 15 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose upsampled image, support Alternate 1 - nice image, doesn't need to be upsampled. Kaldari (talk) 23:15, 15 November 2018 (UTC)



NGC 2818

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 02:48:15 (UTC)

OriginalHubble Space Telescope image of NGC 2818
Reason
High resolution, this image appears in two articles on the English Wikipedia
Articles in which this image appears
NGC 2818, Pyxis
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
NASA, ESA, and the Hubble Heritage Team (STScI/AURA)
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 02:48, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Freshman404Talk 06:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. Doesn't meet size requirements. MER-C 09:36, 13 November 2018 (UTC)



NGC 7635

Voting period ends on 23 Nov 2018 at 02:24:50 (UTC)

Original – Wide field image of NGC 7635 as captured by the Hubble telescope.
Reason
High resolution, this image appears on two articles
Articles in which this image appears
NGC 7635, List of Hubble anniversary images
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
NASA, ESA, Hubble Heritage Team
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 02:24, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • support Beautiful :) Freshman404Talk 06:41, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The caption needs to state that this is not an approximate true color image both here and in the article. Spectral line imaging has encyclopedic and scientific value, but you need to explain this specifically. (The noise is a result of the intentionally narrow bandpass, thus reducing the signal to noise ratio). MER-C 09:52, 13 November 2018 (UTC)



Delist: Cheshire Regiment trench Somme 1916

Voting period ends on 21 Nov 2018 at 13:28:31 (UTC)

World War I
Reason
Short of minimum requirements on both sides (1,400 × 1,069 px) for illustrating World War I, today's POTD. Surely when it comes to such broad topics, better high-resolution alternatives exist, even in natural color.
Articles this image appears in
Cheshire Regiment, 100+ other pages
Previous nomination/s
Nominator
Brandmeistertalk
  • DelistBrandmeistertalk 13:28, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist yes there are surely better quality images showing a trench in WW1. Mattximus (talk) 15:28, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist -- The NMI User (talk) 02:06, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist – Per previous. Sca (talk) 14:59, 13 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist. A higher resolution scan of this photo should also be possible. MER-C 21:29, 13 November 2018 (UTC)



Delist and replace: Ginevra de’ Benci

Voting period ends on 20 Nov 2018 at 12:55:29 (UTC)

Proposed replacement
Reason
Superseded in articles by higher resolution version.
Articles this image appears in
Ginevra de' Benci, etc.
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Ginevra de' Benci
Nominator
MER-C



The Alchemist Discovering Phosphorus

Voting period ends on 19 Nov 2018 at 15:01:49 (UTC)

Reason
High quality reproduction of a painting with its own article and significant impact elsewhere.
Articles in which this image appears
The Alchemist Discovering Phosphorus, Philosopher's stone, History of pseudoscience, etc.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Paintings
Creator
Joseph Wright of Derby
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 15:01, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Question Looking at other versions online, this one looks too dark. Have you seen the picture in real life? 09:29, 11 November 2018 (UTC) Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:51, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
    No, but I found this photograph of the painting as it is displayed (bottom right), which would suggest the painting is darker than some direct photographs on the web. The artist is famous for chiaroscuro, so some darkness is expected. MER-C 20:29, 11 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I think yours is darker than the one you signpost. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:33, 12 November 2018 (UTC)



Marsh fritillary male

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 22:13:17 (UTC)

OriginalMarsh fritillary (Euphydryas aurinia) male in Brickes Wood, Lydlinch, Dorset, England
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons. Illustrates article well.
Articles in which this image appears
Marsh fritillary
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Charlesjsharp
Are fritillaries known for their fertility? – (Sorry!) Sca (talk) 14:31, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
  • No way, they do not breed readily! Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:30, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
Congrats on this quickly approved TFP. – Sca (talk) 14:04, 12 November 2018 (UTC)



Composite macro photo of LED matrix

Voting period ends on 18 Nov 2018 at 21:34:19 (UTC)

Original – Composite image of a 11x44 LED matrix name tag display using SMD LEDs. Top: A little over half of the 21x86 mm display. Center: Close-up of 0.8x1.6mm LEDs in ambient light. Bottom: LEDs in their own red light.
Reason
Very high EV, good quality bellows macro photo (no DOF problem), shows even the minuscule LED chips and gold bonding wires inside the tiny 1.6 x 0.8 mm transparent surface-mount packages. Also shows a wider image of the matrix, as well as LEDs in their own light.
Articles in which this image appears
Light-emitting diode, Surface-mount technology
FP category for this image
materials science
Creator
Janke
  • Support as nominatorJanke | Talk 21:34, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 01:03, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 09:30, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 02:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)



Phidippus otiosus

Voting period ends on 17 Nov 2018 at 01:55:32 (UTC)

Original – Female Phidippus otiosus jumping spider from Highlands County, Florida
Reason
High resolution macro image, good composition, cleanly isolated from background
Articles in which this image appears
Phidippus otiosus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Arachnids
Creator
David E. Hill
  • Support as nominatorKaldari (talk) 01:55, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not enough general sharpness/definition and poor DoF. Quality possibly limited by camera. Line top left (scale?) doesn't work for me. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:40, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
    • @Charlesjsharp: Although this looks a bit like a tarantula, it's actually a tiny jumping spider (about the size of a house fly). With a macro photo of something so small it isn't possible to have both better sharpness and DoF (due to diffraction softening). f/11 (the aperture setting that was used) is right in the sweet spot for an SLR sensor. If you pushed it to f/16 (for more DoF) it would be diffraction limited and start looking soft. Personally, I think the photographer made a good trade-off between DoF and sharpness as most of the spider is in focus, especially the part closest to the viewer. Kaldari (talk) 17:31, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
    • Looking at your user page, it looks like you probably already know everything I wrote above. Do you know of any way you could improve both the sharpness and DoF (as I don't). Kaldari (talk) 17:49, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It's not possible to get an FP of a tiny insect with a normal macro lens. I've photographed dozens but no FPs. The settings are fine otherwise. The secret is focus stacking or specialist camera equipment. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:53, 7 November 2018 (UTC)



Roughtail rock agama

Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 23:11:15 (UTC)

Original – Roughtail rock agama (Stellagama stellio brachydactyla), Dana Biosphere Reserve, Jordan
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons. Important for article
Articles in which this image appears
Stellagama
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 23:11, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support, sharp image, good composition, good EV. Kaldari (talk) 07:23, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 16:58, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Excellent EV, and great quality shot. Mattximus (talk) 23:51, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 02:15, 13 November 2018 (UTC)



Nominations — to be closed

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

Older nominations requiring additional input from users

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

Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Sep 2018 at 18:47:32 (UTC)

Original – Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal
Retouched by Alexis Jazz, third version – Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal
Retouched 2 by Bammesk, second version – Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal
Reason
iconic photograph. After a long debate, it finally appears that the copyright was not renewed.
Articles in which this image appears
Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War II
Creator
Joe Rosenthal
  • Support as nominatorYann (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose this jpeg version due to strong artifacts, either from editing or jpeg compression. The sky is heavily speckled - compare with the png or tif versions. --Janke | Talk 20:30, 27 August 2018 (UTC)
  • I removed the jpeg artifacts. The nom image has a lot more detail than the png and tif versions. Support (revised my vote below) , iconic and good quality for a 1940s war photo. Bammesk (talk) 01:50, 29 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support This is a decent version of this iconic photograph: the EV is huge. Nick-D (talk) 08:12, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Support this new version with less noticeable grain & artifacts. --Janke | Talk 11:02, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • comment what is the source for the copyright not being renewed?©Geni (talk) 14:40, 30 August 2018 (UTC)
  • Reading the arguments on Commons [1], [2], [3], [4], no one has established that copyright was renewed. The summary of Commons arguments are: copyright might have been renewed and that such renewal could not be confirmed in the renewal records [5]. Bammesk (talk) 02:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
    On a sidenote: the photo was published without a copyright notice in a 2016 book [6] [7] of 100 influential photographs by Time magazine. 32 of the 100 photos have a copyright notice and 68 do not, the Iwo Jima photo does not: [8]. This gives additional credence to the public domain arguments on Commons.
  • @Geni: Also this LoC copyright notice. Alexis Jazz (talk) 08:48, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support -- KTC (talk) 10:02, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 12:26, 2 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support -- The NMI User (talk) 01:08, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - I've not yet looked closely at the copyright arguments, and will defer to Commons folk to sort that out. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 02:10, 3 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support GMGtalk 14:34, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support all versions, I'll leave it to others to decide which is best. Alexis Jazz (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I've collected links to the copyright discussions on c:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima. Alexis Jazz (talk) 16:01, 7 September 2018 (UTC)

Retouch discussion

  • Comment the retouched version from Bammesk should be uploaded as a separate file (c:COM:OVERWRITE). While it looks better overall, some details were also lost, so the original needs to be kept as a separate file. If Bammesk uploads the restored version as a separate file and we're voting on that, you can count a support vote from me as well. I'll vote more clearly above. Alexis Jazz (talk) 08:48, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I found another version with less compression artifacts. The sky still looks speckled, I suspect the photo was saved as a .gif at some point. Alexis Jazz (talk) 09:23, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I added a retouched version. Alexis Jazz (talk) 18:03, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Yann, Bammesk, Nick-D, Janke, KTC, MER-C, The NMI User, Rhododendrites, and GreenMeansGo: An alternate image was added the nominations. Please update your !vote to indicate which version(s) you support. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:45, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oh cool. I see lots of dust spot removal, which I wasn't going to fuss about given the nature of the photo. Is there anything else I'm missing? GMGtalk 21:02, 4 September 2018 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: the sky was blurred. Alexis Jazz (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I uploaded another retouch, Retouched 2, made from the higher quality original that Alexis Jazz gave us here. Both retouched noms are worthy of support. My upload has less artifacts and is a bit sharper along soldier/background boundaries, smoother left valley, smoother background between soldier's arms/legs, and I touched up the lower left edge. Also touched up a couple of spots based on the negative image here: [9], [10](no longer so, see below). I Support both retouches but prefer Retouch 2. Bammesk (talk) 04:06, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Either of the versions are OK for me, but Retouched 2 is slightly better. --Yann (talk) 13:20, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I've improved my retouched version a bit. You may have to refresh the page/image in your browser. Alexis Jazz (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Well I'll say that I prefer some retouched version to the original, but my retouching expertise is mediocre at best, and so I don't pretend to have an authoritative opinion on which version is better. GMGtalk 14:44, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I prefer retouch #2. MER-C 18:05, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
@MER-C: can you say why? Perhaps I can improve my version. Alexis Jazz (talk) 00:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Retouch 1 has sufficiently improved over #2 in the time since I wrote that comment. I now prefer #1 as the specs that were there are there no longer. MER-C 15:34, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
Revisiting this after the dust has settled, I prefer #2 due to the white streak on the side. MER-C 11:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I suppose I prefer #2, but two comments: (1) why is the [rivet?] on the helmet of the soldier on the right noticeably brighter in just that version? (2) in both retouches there's a space between the leftmost and second leftmost soldiers, around waist level, that looks to be actually a gap between them rather than a blemish on the photo itself, but it's smoothed out... (in case that isn't clear I've added an annotation to that image on Commons here. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 20:00, 5 September 2018 (UTC)
That's not a gap but actually light that is reflected off of the handle of a holstered knife, more easily seen in File:Raising the Flag on Iwo Jima, by Joe Rosenthal.jpg. I've corrected my version accordingly. Alexis Jazz (talk) 00:25, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Rhododendrites, I don't understand your first question? About question 2: as I said above, I used the negative image here: [11], [12] as a guide. The gap is smaller in the negative, that's what I went by. However looking at the negative more carefully, it has bleeding (or diffusion) because it is old, which would make the gaps smaller. So I did a recheck of all gaps, and compared the print gaps to the negative gaps, and it turns out all print gaps are a few pixels wider than the negative gaps. So going strictly by the negative is not a good idea (because of the bleeding). I redid the gap and did an upload (also redid another tiny gap/spot at shoulder level, plus helmet of left soldier, the things I had relied on the negative for). Thanks for the question! Bammesk (talk) 00:34, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • @Rhododendrites: Can you say what you mean in your first question? Nothing “on the helmet of the soldier on the right” is “noticeably brighter” in any version! Bammesk (talk) 12:14, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I've been following and I'd just like to say that maybe this discussion is not yet ripe to be closed. The images are evolving, which is ultimately for the good of the project(s), and this is an iconic image of the type we don't often see discussed. GMGtalk 22:36, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: I agree. I'm not sure if we are done retouching (unless someone points out flaws in my version, I am) but if we are it still leaves us with three images to pick from. Since I created one of them, I support all three. There are arguments for sticking to the original and between the retouched versions it'll largely be matter of taste. Bammesk filled in the gaps one way, I did it another way. Alexis Jazz (talk) 10:51, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
  • For reference, Commons promoted the original. MER-C 14:05, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Actually 16 of 18 votes on Commons here were for a restored version uploaded at 02:11, 29 August 2018. Bammesk (talk) 03:01, 18 September 2018 (UTC) . . . Obviously the higher quality original uploaded later at 09:16, 4 September 2018, is more deserving of promotion, but not when there is a cleaned up version of it, IMO. Bammesk (talk) 03:12, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • So how exactly ought we go about finding some resolution to this nomination? GMGtalk 21:37, 17 October 2018 (UTC)
    @GreenMeansGo: Everyone, who already voted, should indicate which version(s) they support. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:01, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
    I swapped my preference to retouch 2. Putting my admin and ex-FPC closer hat on, I would now close this as promote retouch 2 if I hadn't had voted - the choice is between the retouches, and #2 has more first preferences than #1. MER-C 11:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Re-pinging participants. This has been open now for almost two months, and we do need to try to find some type of resolution.
    @Yann:@Janke:@Bammesk:@Nick-D:@Geni:@Alexis Jazz:@KTC:@The NMI User:@Rhododendrites:@Armbrust:
    GMGtalk 12:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
@GreenMeansGo: As I said, I support all three. But I will say this: when I added to/updated Wikipedias, I used the original. Leaving it to the Wikipedias to switch to a retouched version. No Wikipedia (zero, not Norsk Wikipedia) (zero, the number, not Wikipedia Zero) made the switch. - Alexis Jazz 18:46, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support retouched1 I think this is an improvement on the original, and retouched2 looks a little bit washed out Nick-D (talk) 07:41, 1 November 2018 (UTC)

Closing procedure

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

When NOT promoted, perform the following:

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

When promoted, perform the following:

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

Delist closing procedure

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Recently closed nominations

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

Persepolis

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 10:11:23 (UTC)

Original – Panoramic view of Persepolis, the ceremonial capital of the Achaemenid Empire
Reason
Highly detailed panorama of this World Heritage site. Featured on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Persepolis, History of Iran
FP category for this image
link to category (listed on the WP:FP page) that best describes the image
Creator
Diego Delso
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 10:11, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Horizon bent & tilted, looks very weird. Could perhaps be fixed (but only from original RAW images, per author's request). --Janke | Talk 10:51, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Per Janke. Sca (talk) 15:03, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. A beautiful Panoramic picture. Gnosis (talk) 20:36, 12 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Freshman404Talk 06:38, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:01, 16 November 2018 (UTC)



Broadway Tower, Worcestershire

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 06:53:26 (UTC)

OriginalBroadway Tower is a folly on Broadway Hill, near the large village of Broadway, in the English county of Worcestershire, at the second-highest point of the Cotswolds (after Cleeve Hill). Broadway Tower's base is 1,024 feet (312 metres) above sea level. The tower itself stands 65 feet (20 metres) high.
Reason
Good image quality, already featured Commons, and used in several articles. It looks like User:Saffron Blaze started to nominate this photo but may not have transcluded the nomination because it expired without votes other than his/her own. There is another photo of the tower which is already featured, and I think that having them both be featured is okay.
Articles in which this image appears
Broadway Tower, Worcestershire, Folly, Worcestershire, Cotswold Way, James Wyatt, Thomas Phillipps, Architecture of the United Kingdom
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Saffron Blaze
  • Support as nominatorPine 06:53, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: Another (properly transcluded) previous nom is at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/File:Broadway Tower 2012.jpg. --Paul_012 (talk) 13:34, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Overly extensive surrounding space that lacks visual information. Sca (talk) 15:06, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – per Paul we have an existing FP [13]. The nom image has more detail, I would support a delist and replace. Bammesk (talk) 00:58, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I would also support a crop and the replacement of the existing image. MER-C 17:16, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Because we already have a featured image of this building. I believe for EV purposes we are to have only 1 picture nominated per subject. Mattximus (talk) 23:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:00, 16 November 2018 (UTC)



Paxton's Tower

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Nov 2018 at 06:36:52 (UTC)

OriginalPaxton's Tower is a Neo-Gothic folly erected in honour of Lord Nelson. It is a visitor attraction that can be combined with a visit to the nearby National Botanic Garden of Wales. Its high location provides views over the Botanic Gardens and the Tywi valley. The tower, a grade II* listed building, is under the care of the National Trust.
Reason
Good EV
Articles in which this image appears
Paxton's Tower
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Mattofaberystwyth, edited by Pine
  • Support as nominatorPine 06:36, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Looks good to me, great EV. Mattximus (talk) 23:52, 8 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 09:29, 9 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak oppose – the shadow size on the front face is too large. An image like this would be an improvement. Bammesk (talk) 14:18, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:00, 16 November 2018 (UTC)



Bates Hall, Boston Public Library

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 15 Nov 2018 at 04:17:46 (UTC)

Original – Bates Hall, Boston Public Library
Alternate – denoised and brighter shadows
Reason
Renowned historical monument, captures the atmosphere of the place, good resolution and EV
Articles in which this image appears
Boston Public Library, McKim Building, Boston Public Library
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
Creator
Hari Krishnan
  • Support as nominator – Hari Krishnan 04:17, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Dizzying perspective... Should either have been shot with a tilt-shift lens or been perspective-corrected in software. --Janke | Talk 07:12, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Not used in any articles. MER-C 10:13, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
    I still oppose this nomination for the noise. MER-C 09:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Image added to articles. Hari Krishnan 12:05, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Looks tilty and out of whack perspective-wise, perhaps because symmetrical tableau was shot a bit off-center. Sca (talk) 14:40, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Perspective corrected, uploaded over original. Revert if you don't like it. --Janke | Talk 16:46, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Great image, portrays the subdued dynamism inside a library, good colors, proper lighting, perspective correction looks good, good EV. Kalart 22:33, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
    Struck !vote because the user doesn't meet the requirements. (Account wasn't registered 25 days ago and it didn't make 100 edits.) Armbrust The Homunculus 02:13, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Quality is nothing like the current standard for interiors on Commons. Ceiling all grainy. Charlesjsharp (talk) 23:06, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support alternate – I added an alternate edited version (denoised and pulled up the levels of darker areas). Pinging those who voted @Hari Krishnan, Janke, MER-C, Sca, and Charlesjsharp:. Alternate image is a bit softer but still has good detail at full size. Bammesk (talk) 14:08, 10 November 2018 (UTC)
    I think the alternative, while an improvement, is too soft to meet current standards. MER-C 21:38, 10 November 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 04:18, 15 November 2018 (UTC)



Delist: Tower Bridge

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 14 Nov 2018 at 08:38:54 (UTC)

Tower Bridge at dusk
Reason
No longer used in any article.
Articles this image appears in
Used to be in Tower Bridge
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Tower Bridge
Nominator
Paul_012 (talk)
  • DelistPaul_012 (talk) 08:38, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Hmmm, I think we can do better than the current lead image in the article and replace it with something. File:Puente de la Torre, Londres, Inglaterra, 2014-08-11, DD 092.JPG or File:Tower Bridge from Shad Thames.jpg perhaps? MER-C 11:42, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
    Keep if it sticks. Everyone and their dog has an image of Tower Bridge, so I suspect this might get bumped again. This is one of the best ones. MER-C 09:57, 7 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It's a good photo though, it seems very high resolution and sharp. It shows the bridge a lot more accurately in terms of colours, and from a better angle, than the current lead image. Why can someone not just simply put this image back in the article rather than delist it?131.111.184.8 (talk) 15:31, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • It's a much better photo than the current lead image, I just added it back. If its stable then we don't need to delist. Mattximus (talk) 16:04, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep - Good photo, no reason to delist. --Janke | Talk 17:45, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment: The reason I didn't replace the infobox image myself is that looking at the history, it seems the article's infobox image doesn't appear to have been stable at all. --Paul_012 (talk) 04:57, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Other current FP
  • There's also the other night FP, which is also underutilised. They're great photos, but it seems we haven't been able to get them both to stick in the article. Some editors prefer a daytime photo for the infobox, and File:Tower Bridge from Shad Thames.jpg was a promising replacement, but its nom failed because others disliked the skyscrapers in the background. --Paul_012 (talk) 12:56, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Keep I don't think that there is a good reason to delist this. If there is disagreement in the article about whether a night view or day view is better, and we have good photos of both, then both can go in the article. --Pine 06:28, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Kept --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:57, 14 November 2018 (UTC)



G.D Block Saltlake Durgapujo 2018 (জী. ডি. ব্লক সল্টলেক দূর্গা পুজো ২০১৮)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2018 at 13:24:31 (UTC)

Original – Goddess Durga and a pantheon of other gods and goddesses being worshipped during Durga Puja 2 Festival in Kolkata. This image was taken in Block - G.D, Saltlake Durga Puja 2018 in North Kolkata.
Reason
Its a high quality and resolution image that has already been adjudged as a featured image in Wikipedia Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Durga Puja, bh: दुर्गा पूजा
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator
Subhrajyoti07
  • Support as nominatorSubhrajyoti07 (talk) 13:24, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I'm not sure about the EV. The article is for a festival, but this seems to be some sculptures? I don't see the connection. Shouldn't an image about a festival contain people? Mattximus (talk) 14:00, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Durga Puja celebrates the mythology of Goddess Durga (at the center) killing the demon (asura - at her feet) after a fierce battle. Every Puja or Pandal has a central theme which is these sculptures. People come to visit these locations to primarily see these sculptures and other associated decorations. This is the centerpiece of attraction. - Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 14:18, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – about the EV, article's lead paragraph says "festival that features elaborate temple and stage decorations", there is also a section on "Decorations: sculptures and stages" in the article [14]. The section says sculptures are made of clay and then painted (specifically and annually for each festival it seems), and it's a "ceremonial process". Is this a clay sculpture?! It doesn't look like one! Also, perhaps this image could have good EV in the Murti article. Bammesk (talk) 14:44, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Predominantly clay is used in creating these sculptures. However these days artists are using other mediums such as fiber glass, paper etc as well. This particular one I believe is made of clay and then painted in the shiny golden colour. These sculptures and the housings inside which they are created are put up for about 10 days of celebration. After the 10th day (called dashami) the idols are immersed in local waterbodies - called "bisarjan". So every year they get created and then gets taken apart.- Subhrajyoti07 (talk) 15:05, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – making and display of these sculptures seem to be a big part of the festival, so I am Ok with it. But adding the image to other related articles can improve its encyclopedic value, for example [15], [16] or similar articles. Bammesk (talk) 15:28, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment. Are the backing of the statues meant to be not upright? The bottom right hanging charm is slightly cut off. I'm quite surprised these issues weren't picked up on Commons, but as this image was rather hard to take I won't oppose. MER-C 12:02, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - The original image had the entire bottom right hanging decoration which somehow got cropped out in subsequent versions. I have re-uploaded the image to include the same in totality. However I am not sure if I am able to follow you about the backing of the statues not being upright.- Subhrajyoti07 talk 16:12, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Draw a vertical line downwards in your favorite image editing program on the edges of all backing boards (or zoom in, and align one with the edge of your screen). The question is: are the statues actually like this in the real world, or does the photo need some kind of tilt and perspective correction? It seems better in the newer version, but the problem, if there is a problem, is more than just a mere tilt. MER-C 19:05, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
  • The statues look nicely upright so I don't see a need for perspective correction. About the back panels: I think that's how they just are, the construction doesn't necessarily follow architectural precision or alignment, there are 3 separate base pedestals, and the 2 left statues and the 2 right statues face sideways a bit more than if the whole thing was constructed with a two dimensional flat perspective in mind. Just my 2 cents :) Bammesk (talk) 01:03, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I think this is how the original set up was actually done. Trying to compensate it through manual lens correction will play foul with the front sculptures, which is the main focus of the image. - Subhrajyoti07 talk 03:55, 6 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support as my objections have been satisfactorily addressed. MER-C 09:31, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:40, 13 November 2018 (UTC)



Bothrops bilineatus

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2018 at 18:09:18 (UTC)

OriginalBothrops bilineatus
Reason
High resolution, nearly unanimously featured on Commons, essential for article.
Articles in which this image appears
Bothrops bilineatus
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Reptiles
Creator
Renato Augusto Martins
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 18:09, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – Arresting colors, fairly good detail. Sca (talk) 21:16, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – Not perfect, but I do think it has high EV. Mattximus (talk) 14:01, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 14:26, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:31, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - even though I get a feeling we see two snakes, the left one having bitten the head off the right one... ;-) --Janke | Talk 19:51, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Cobra-papagaio - Bothrops bilineatus - Ilhéus - Bahia.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:10, 12 November 2018 (UTC)



Delist and replace: Duck and Cover

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2018 at 20:25:40 (UTC)

Proposed replacement
Reason
Replaced in articles with higher resolution version
Articles this image appears in
Duck and cover, Duck and Cover (film)
Previous nomination/s
Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Duck and Cover
Nominator
MER-C
  • ReplaceMER-C 20:25, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Sure, much better resolution, but the contrast is way too low. Somenone care to hike it a bit? (I'me totally unfamiliar with the OGG format myself...) --Janke | Talk 13:09, 31 October 2018 (UTC)

Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

  • There is no consensus to replace the current featured picture, but it can't retain that status, as it isn't used in any article curretly. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)



Nilgai

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2018 at 20:56:57 (UTC)

Original – Male nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) in India; the largest antelope in Asia
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons. Essential for article.
Articles in which this image appears
Nilgai
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 20:56, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 21:05, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 00:09, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – on EV grounds. Mattximus (talk) 14:02, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support --Pine 06:32, 6 November 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Nilgai (Boselaphus tragocamelus) male.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:28, 8 November 2018 (UTC)



Candy apple

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2018 at 18:18:19 (UTC)

OriginalCandy apple or toffee apple is a whole apple covered in a hard toffee or sugar candy coating, with a stick inserted as a handle. These are a common treat at autumn festivals in Western culture
Reason
Interesting subject taken by one of our FP suppliers.
Articles in which this image appears
Candy apple, Halloween
FP category for this image
Food and drink
Creator
Evan-Amos
  • Support as nominatorBrandmeistertalk 18:18, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Meh. Sca (talk) 13:33, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak Oppose - Would prefer an image with a background rather than floating in space. Kaldari (talk) 21:04, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Would you mind answering why you think a white background isn't a background? 344917661X (talk) 01:46, 5 November 2018 (UTC)
Charles, you notice everything! – Sca (talk) 12:40, 31 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Chris857 (talk) 15:59, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – agree with Kaldari about background or some shadow, but well done otherwise and EV. Bammesk (talk) 00:25, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I find the argument that an image needs to have a proper background in order to be promoted to FPS to be stupid, since the featured picture criteria does not say that an image requires a proper background in order to be promoted, and a white background is still a background nonetheless. The arguments above, including the one I mentioned before, are extremely nit-picky. 344917661X (talk) 02:37, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I'm not a fan of the noise/artifacts on the shiny surface, but this is a fairly minor nitpick. MER-C 18:01, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – I would normally support, but it is upside-down... Candy apples are not eaten with the stick up. Mattximus (talk) 13:59, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I see it as how it is served [17] rather than eaten. Bammesk (talk) 14:59, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • I agree with Bammesk. When Candy apples are on display, they are usually upside down, like the one in the image that has been nominated. 344917661X (talk) 19:17, 3 November 2018 (UTC)
  • This would be less confusing if the image had a background. Then you could tell if it was being served or eaten or something else. Kaldari (talk) 02:16, 5 November 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Tastee-Candy-Apple-Red-Caramel-wPeanuts.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:28, 7 November 2018 (UTC)



Eagle Nebula (2nd nomination)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2018 at 04:59:19 (UTC)

Original – Three-colour composite mosaic image of the Eagle Nebula (Messier 16, or NGC 6611), based on images obtained with the Wide-Field Imager camera on the MPG/ESO 2.2-metre telescope at the La Silla Observatory. This wide-field image shows not only the central pillars, but also several others in the same star-forming region, as well as a huge number of stars in front of, in, or behind the Eagle Nebula. The cluster of bright stars to the upper right is NGC 6611, home to the massive and hot stars that illuminate the pillars. The “Spire” — another large pillar — is in the middle left of the image. This image is a composite of 3 filters in the visible range: B (blue), V (green) and R (red).
Reason
Good quality for an astronomy photo, and is the lead image for the Eagle Nebula article
Articles in which this image appears
Eagle Nebula, Nebulae in fiction, Gum catalog, RCW Catalogue, Sharpless catalog, The Whole Shebang: A State-of-the-Universe(s) Report
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
ESO
  • Support as nominatorPine 04:59, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support But too much information in the description. Much would be better done as notes on the image. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:20, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – EV, looks a bit too noisy, but probably as good as it gets for years to come. Bammesk (talk) 00:33, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – Great EV. --Janke | Talk 12:53, 4 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. While I feel that this image could do with a larger field of view, we can always replace it later. This is good enough. MER-C 14:05, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Eagle Nebula from ESO.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 05:00, 7 November 2018 (UTC)



Common seal (Phoca vitulina)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2018 at 22:19:45 (UTC)

OriginalCommon seal (Phoca vitulina) off Lismore, Argyll, Scotland
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Common seal
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 22:19, 27 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Would prefer a tighter crop for use on Wikipedia, but otherwise looks great. Kaldari (talk) 21:07, 30 October 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 00:17, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 18:00, 2 November 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. I'll take the fifth. --Janke | Talk 12:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Common seal (Phoca vitulina) 2.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:20, 6 November 2018 (UTC)



Lord Murugan Statue

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2018 at 18:43:15 (UTC)

Original – The statue of Lord Murugan beside the staircase leading to the entrance of the Batu Caves (behind the statue's head).
Reason
Commons POTY finalist in 2015 with clear EV.
Articles in which this image appears
Lord Murugan Statue, God, Batu Caves, and others
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Artwork/Sculpture
Creator
Uwe Aranas
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 18:43, 25 October 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 00:46, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Main target article is a tiny stub. "God" as a target article is presumptuous to say the least. Sca (talk) 13:34, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I agree. The image isn't even in the main box for the Batu caves article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 19:08, 26 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. The perspective is really confusing and a makes estimating the statue's size difficult. --Paul_012 (talk) 08:54, 4 November 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:22, 4 November 2018 (UTC)



Sheikh Mansour Leghaei

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2018 at 13:14:48 (UTC)

Original – Islamic scholar Dr Sheikh Mansour Leghaei
Reason
Good quality and lighting. Article's only image where it replaced an inferior version.
Articles in which this image appears
Mansour Leghaei
FP category for this image
People
Creator
Muhammad Mahdi Karim
  • Support as nominatorMuhammad(talk) 13:14, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • I guess I'm not the only one returning to FPC after a long absence - welcome back! Anyway, you should be aware that the size limit is now 1500x1500. MER-C 13:21, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the welcome and the heads up. I have uploaded a higher res version --Muhammad(talk) 13:32, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. --Gnosis (talk) 06:36, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose not a great portrait. Lighting, background, sharpness, crop. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:51, 24 October 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:15, 2 November 2018 (UTC)



World War I casualties

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2018 at 02:58:27 (UTC)

Original – British wounded of the Royal Berkshire Regiment returning from fighting on Bazentin Ridge, July 1916.
Reason
Lead image for World War I casualties, featured on Commons
Articles in which this image appears
World War I casualties, British Army during World War I, Ernest Brooks (photographer)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/World War I
Creator
Ernest Brooks (photographer)
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 02:58, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support as before. MER-C 06:37, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
    Furthermore it would be great to get this on the main page for 11 November (100 years since the end of World War I). MER-C 13:30, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Good encyclopedic value, irreplacable historic photograph, decent quality. TSP (talk) 10:49, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment I suspect that this image would benefit from a crop which removes the coat on the right-hand side of the frame. Nick-D (talk) 05:23, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 06:19, 2 November 2018 (UTC)

  • Nomination didn’t reach the necessary quorum for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 06:19, 2 November 2018 (UTC)



Silver spotted skipper

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Nov 2018 at 03:06:36 (UTC)

Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Hesperia comma
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 03:06, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – sorry but busy composition, the main subject doesn't stand out. Bammesk (talk) 03:30, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Renomination. Voters in previous nom were MER-C, ♪♫Al and Janke Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:52, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – I "skipped" it last time... Too messy composition for my taste, unfortunately. --Janke | Talk 08:14, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Per Bammesk, Janke. Too jumbled. Sca (talk) 13:36, 23 October 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 06:18, 2 November 2018 (UTC)



Tropical cyclone diagram

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Nov 2018 at 19:40:30 (UTC)

Original – A cross section diagram of a mature tropical cyclone, with arrows indicating air flow in and around the eye
Reason
Clear diagrammatic explanation of the structure of a tropical cyclone. Compare to [18], [19] and [20]. Featured on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Tropical cyclone, Eye (cyclone)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Others
Creator
Kelvin13
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 19:40, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment To be encyclopaedic, the diagram should not use the term hurricane. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:05, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • "hurricane" is used commonly in the articles. Bammesk (talk) 03:34, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Not in much of the pacific where typhoon or tropical cyclone are used. Charlesjsharp (talk) 07:48, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Yes there are other terms as well. "Hurricane" is used in above articles and elsewhere on Wikipedia, so I don't see it as a mistake or hindrance. Bammesk (talk) 02:22, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – EV. Bammesk (talk) 02:22, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Should be Tropical Cyclone, not hurricane, since this formation can occur in the Pacific. Mattximus (talk) 15:00, 27 October 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:02, 1 November 2018 (UTC)



Delist and replace: Deleted and renamed file cleanup

This is a notification, not a nomination. I have deleted the following pages, previously containing featured pictures, because:

I've forgotten how to deal with these and they are in some inconsistent state. It also looks like File:Edward Hopper - Girl at a Sewing Machine (1921).jpg can be uploaded locally. MER-C 12:31, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

I've also tagged the following images as featured pictures. The originals promoted have been renamed on Commons, but their local FP tag got lost somehow in the mix.

Note that File:Duck And Cover (1951) Bert The Turtle.webm has been replaced in articles by File:Duck and Cover 1440 x 1080 01836081.webm, a higher resolution version. I will nominate it for replacing separately. The images listed at Wikipedia:Featured pictures and subpages are now in sync with Category:Featured pictures.

The only action required here is to determine whether File:Edward Hopper - Girl at a Sewing Machine (1921).jpg can be uploaded locally, and to upload it. I'm not a Commons admin, so I can't do this. If the image can be uploaded locally, then I'll restore the local file description page. MER-C 15:15, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

  • @MER-C: That could only be uploaded under fair use, if can't be proven it was published before 1923. (In which case it couldn't retain its featured status). But if that's possible, than it's undeletion should be requested on Commons. Armbrust The Homunculus 15:35, 28 October 2018 (UTC)
    • Ahh, yes, the publication of a painting problem. I see that you have effectively delisted it (all that remains is removal from FPT). Duck and cover has been nominated for replacement, so I think we're done here. MER-C 20:20, 29 October 2018 (UTC)
      • Edward Hopper is American, and the picture was probably painted in New York. Therefore ability to host on Commons == ability to host here. I'm not going to pursue the undeletion of the image. MER-C 17:09, 31 October 2018 (UTC)


Horace Greeley

Original – Horace Greeley, taken between 1860 and 1865
Reason
A historical photograph of Horace Greeley, the Liberal Republican/Democratic nominee in the 1872 U.S. presidential election. A bot originally uploaded this in 2011 but it wasn't used anywhere until now. In addition, this is the lead image for Greeley's page. The previous lead image wasn't a photograph for almost a decade.
Articles in which this image appears
Horace Greeley, Horace Greeley presidential campaign, 1872
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Political
Creator
Possibly Mathew Brady. The NARA didn't say who created this.

Not promoted (nomination withdrawn) MER-C 16:52, 31 October 2018 (UTC)



Albizia saman (rain tree) in the Mekong

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 31 Oct 2018 at 14:23:16 (UTC)

Original – An Albizia saman (rain tree) in the Mekong
Reason
Lead image for the most relevant article, and already featured on Commons
Articles in which this image appears
Albizia saman, Si Phan Don
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Others
Creator
Basile Morin
  • Support as nominatorPine 14:23, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Only a tree....and not sharp especially on the left --LivioAndronico (talk) 17:13, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  • It has been proved that Livioandronico2013, Σπάρτακος and Architas are the same person. They have all been banned on Commons because of revenge votes and vandalism. Now they pretend to be colleagues but they're obviously not. Another proof that Livioandronico2013 and Architas (official sockpuppet of Σπάρτακος) are the same is this diff, where the (banned) author signs Livioandronico2013 while the vote comes from Architas -- Basile Morin (talk) 03:36, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Learn to grow, and accept the votes against .... If I do not like it does not mean that it is a vendetta .... why should I take revenge? not even who you are! Then objectively what? Σπάρτακος is just a colleague of mine, I have not denied all accounts only One ... then little I care it was a matter of conscience. You're calmer, thanks.--LivioAndronico (talk) 08:54, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – EV, the main subject (the tree) is sharp, I am Ok with a bit of un-sharp background. Bammesk (talk) 01:22, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Pine, for the nomination. Previous success on Commons -- Basile Morin (talk) 01:23, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Nice composition and execution. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:18, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 08:54, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Illustrates the subject very well, contrary to the plethora of photos in the gallery, most of them of the same tree - someone ought to do I did some pruning in that gallery! ;-) --Janke | Talk 11:29, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 02:53, 23 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - I don't typically take part in FPC discussions, but this is a wonderful picture and clearly meets the criteria. Definitely think this would be a great featured picture.--SkyGazer 512 Oh no, what did I do this time? 01:08, 24 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Aoba47 (talk) 04:26, 25 October 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Flooded Albizia Saman (rain tree) in the Mekong.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:26, 31 October 2018 (UTC)



Lady at the Tea Table

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 30 Oct 2018 at 20:32:00 (UTC)

OriginalLady at the Tea Table, painting by Mary Cassatt. The painting was the first of Cassat's works enter the collection of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, where it is now on display.
Reason
The image in question is a painting by a well-known artist, has an interesting history behind it, and has an article concerning it. It is in the public domain courtesy of the Metropolitan Museum of Art, and is of high resolution.
Articles in which this image appears
Lady at the Tea Table, Mary Cassatt
FP category for this image
Artwork
Creator
Pharos
  • Support as nominatorSamHolt6 (talk) 01:03, 15 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Added to nomination list, 10 days stars from now. MER-C 20:33, 20 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Need to to something about the black surround. Charlesjsharp (talk) 06:39, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support conditionally on cropping out the black portion...The Herald (Benison) (talk) 12:22, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Conditional support - I agree this needs a crop. MER-C 14:38, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  • not a crop as that would remove some of the photo. Needs a re-shoot or careful edit. Conditional support is not as far as I can see, a valid vote on FP The Herald (Benison) MER-C.Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:26, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Support --LivioAndronico (talk) 17:12, 21 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I am almost Ok with the black portion, but I prefer a file conversion to PNG and then replacing the black portion with transparency. Agree with Charles about not cropping the borders of the canvas, I also oppose cloning to change the border of the canvas. Bammesk (talk) 01:12, 22 October 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - Not a crop but a slight perspective adjustment is absolutely necessary. No problem on a black background, but on a white one it's really ugly, then not FP -- Basile Morin (talk) 04:03, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:35, 30 October 2018 (UTC)


Suspended nominations

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

Kailash Satyarthi

Voting period ends on 25 Nov 2018 at 01:30:39 (UTC)

OriginalKailash Satyarthi is an Indian children's rights activist. He is a Nobel Peace Prize recipient and founder of Bachpan Bachao Andolan (lit. Save Childhood Movement), the Kailash Satyarthi Children’s Foundation, Global March Against Child Labour, and GoodWeave International.
Reason
Good shot, great EV in both the articles used
Articles in which this image appears
Kailash Satyarthi, List of Indian Nobel laureates
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Others
Creator
Aditi Mukherji