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

Space Shuttle Atlantis over the Mediterranean Sea

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2018 at 05:43:25 (UTC)

Original – Space Shuttle Atlantis during mission STS-129, seen over the Mediterranean Sea, after departing the International Space Station
Reason
Lede image for STS-129, and informative photo of the shuttle in space with its cargo bay doors open. While artistically unremarkable, it has good educational value, especially when viewed at 100% to make the details of the shuttle most visible.
Articles in which this image appears
STS-129
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
Creator
Expedition 21 crew
  • Support as nominatorPine 05:43, 25 September 2018 (UTC)



STS-129 Atlantis Ready to Fly

Voting period ends on 5 Oct 2018 at 05:27:54 (UTC)

Original – "The Space Shuttle Atlantis is seen on launch pad 39A at the NASA Kennedy Space Center shortly after the rotating service structure was rolled back on Nov. 15, 2009. Atlantis is scheduled to launch at 2:28 p.m. EST, Nov. 16, 2009."
Reason
Very interesting image, informative regarding the structure of the launch platform, nice colors, and used in multiple articles
Articles in which this image appears
STS-129, Kennedy Space Center Launch Complex 39, Kennedy Space Center, Space Shuttle
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Getting there
Creator
NASA/Bill Ingalls
  • Support as nominatorPine 05:27, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Is this level of noise acceptable nowadays? Counterbalancing that is that this picture is irreplaceable. Not sure how to vote yet. MER-C 19:46, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – I'm not bothered by the noise, since the details are sharp enough. Somebody could give the sky (but nothing else) a bit of de-noising, though. --Janke | Talk 19:55, 25 September 2018 (UTC)



Passiflora incarnata

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2018 at 19:33:12 (UTC)

Original – Passiflora incarnata
Reason
Made the finals of POTD last year, lead image for both the species and genus. Should be a fairly obvious shoo-in.
Articles in which this image appears
Passiflora, Passiflora incarnata
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
PumpkinSky
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 19:33, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support --Pine 05:18, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – The structure of pistils and stamen is verey peculiar in this species (see [1]), and, unfortunately, this flower is either immature, or shot from an angle that won't show it clearly. --Janke | Talk 09:09, 25 September 2018 (UTC)



Diagram of the Sun

Voting period ends on 4 Oct 2018 at 07:00:56 (UTC)

Original – The structure of the Sun
Reason
Featured on Commons, cool diagram
Articles in which this image appears
Sun, Stellar structure, Radiation zone, Convection zone, Granule (solar physics), Solar core, Tachocline, etc.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Understanding
Creator
Kelvinsong
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 07:00, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • My recollection of astronomy books is that the convective zone is pictured with arrows similar to File:ConvectionCells.svg and the radiative zone with radial arrows. The glow of the core serves the former, so that's fine. Failed last time for procedural reasons, but deserves another hearing on merit. Otherwise, no problems. Support. MER-C 19:42, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support with caution I am not an expert in heliophysics but as a layperson this looks good to me, and certainly helpful to Wikipedia readers if the content is accurate. --Pine 05:15, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • I've left a note about this nomination at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Astronomy. GMGtalk 10:39, 25 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. This is a very good diagram that was created to illustrate a set of articles about the structure of stars, later part of the template that transcludes the common information in the articles. See Template:Structure of the Sun and the articles linked in the template. Not only does the illustration carefully follow the sizes of the regions for the sun mentioned in the articles, the color transition from white hot interior darkening to deeper red near the surface illustrates the way the temperature decreases outward. (Hot objects like iron cool from white to orange to red.) StarryGrandma (talk) 17:06, 25 September 2018 (UTC)



Coventry Cathedral

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 19:06:46 (UTC)

Original – Coventry Cathedral
Reason
pic of the old Cathedral, bombed in WW2, which is a Commons FP.
Articles in which this image appears
Coventry Cathedral, Coventry, The Blitz
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Andrew Walker
  • Support as nominator –  — Amakuru (talk) 19:06, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment - I did also consider nominating this as a set, with File:Coventry Cathedral 2018.jpg, a Commons Quality Picture showing the new cathedral. Not sure on the rules for sets though - they are not by the same creator, for example. If anyone thinks that would work, please let me know and I'll add it in.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:08, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    I'd consider a separate nomination for that image instead. MER-C 20:41, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    Fair enough.  — Amakuru (talk) 21:16, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support The NMI User (talk) 06:09, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Weak support. Hmmm, I can't quite come around to giving this a full support due to the soft focus. There's something about the composition being a little too tightly cropped, but if the photographer's back was against the wall I understand - we don't want the entry price for FPC being a full frame camera and $1000+ lenses. MER-C 19:48, 24 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Regretful oppose due to focus problems at the edges of the frame. I like the composition, but even in 2012 I think that the focus problems should have been a red flag, and in 2018 I think that we should be able to do much better for "Wikipedia's best work". --Pine 05:21, 25 September 2018 (UTC)



Rwandan genocide

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 18:50:52 (UTC)

Original – Human skulls at the Nyamata Genocide Memorial, Rwanda
Reason
Commons FP, and it's the main image for the article Rwandan genocide. Displays of the skulls of victims are a common theme in genocide memorial sites across Rwanda.
Articles in which this image appears
Rwandan genocide, Rwanda, Nyamata Genocide Memorial + 33 others
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/War
Creator
Fanny Schertzer
  • Support as nominator –  — Amakuru (talk) 18:50, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - I can well understand it's a FP on Commons, but the "artistic" framing and lighting with deep shadows lessen the EV here. --Janke | Talk 19:00, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
    You may think so, but it certainly features in an awful lot of articles and has been the primary image for Rwandan genocide for many years now.  — Amakuru (talk) 19:09, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose. I partially agree with the concern about EV, but regardless, this image is full of JPEG artifacts and noise. MER-C 12:30, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose it lacks EV, it does not specifically describe any of the three pages it is in. Mattximus (talk) 16:15, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per Previous. The NMI User (talk) 06:09, 24 September 2018 (UTC)



Eurasian brown bear

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 18:27:16 (UTC)

Original – Eurasian brown bear
Reason
Commons FP, main image for the article, and illustrates this animal well
Articles in which this image appears
Eurasian brown bear, Brown bear, List of national animals, Whipsnade Zoo
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Francis C. Franklin
  • Support as nominator –  — Amakuru (talk) 18:27, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - oversharpened, leading to artifacts on fur coat. MER-C 12:26, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Per MER-C. The NMI User (talk) 06:08, 24 September 2018 (UTC)



Two juvenile Nubian ibex kids in Mitzpe Ramon, Israel

Voting period ends on 30 Sep 2018 at 07:10:18 (UTC)

Original – Two juvenile Nubian ibex kids in Mitzpe Ramon, Israel
Reason
EV, clarity, cuteness
Articles in which this image appears
Nubian ibex
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Rhododendrites
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 07:10, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - For the same reasons I nominated this one some months back (see Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Nubian ibex kids), which was closed as no quorum with 4 supports and 0 opposes. Thanks for renominating, The NMI User. I see it's also nominated on Commons. To me it's a better fit for FP here, given the EV/size tradeoff, but it's been demonstrated that I don't have a great handle on how other people perceive the differences in the processes. :) — Rhododendrites talk \\ 15:19, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. MER-C 17:55, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose as on Commons. Size, lighting, techncical quality. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:19, 21 September 2018 (UTC)



Nintendo Switch Image

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 20:35:18 (UTC)

Original – The Nintendo Switch, a hybrid portable/home console released by Nintendo in 2017. It is shown here in the docked/home mode, with the controllers detached from the main unit and in the included grip.
Reason
High quality image of the Nintendo Switch captured by one of the best photographers on Wikipedia.
Articles in which this image appears
Eighth generation of video game consoles, History of Nintendo, Nintendo Switch, Nintendo video game consoles
FP category for this image
Creator
Evan-Amos
  • Support As nominator. 344917661X (talk) 20:35, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 09:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Might want to hold this off POTD until the Switch gets discontinued, but no problems from a FPC perspective. MER-C 11:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Free advertising. And object is of no intrinsic visual interest. Boring. Sca (talk) 13:20, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
    Your second point is the key difference between Commons FPC and en.wp FPC -- this is a legit encyclopedic topic, and we need to illustrate it with a competently done image. Visual wow is not as important here. The advertising concerns can be addressed by not putting this image on the Main Page as POTD until the Switch and its games are no longer sold. The photographer is not being paid to market the Switch, and took this photo as one of many images of consoles. MER-C 14:14, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
Obviously, these images are fine for the narrow purpose of illustrating the devices they depict. But they are of zero interest to the great majority of the millions of readers who view the Main Page daily – i.e., those who do not play video games. Sca (talk) 16:30, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
I'm pretty sure the majority of people visiting the main page have played or currently play video games, wether they are casual gamers, hardcore gamers or people who used to play video games, but have stopped. Just because a picture we feature on the front page isn't interesting to most people, doesn't mean we aren't putting the picture on the front page. 344917661X (talk) 21:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
 • Your being "pretty sure" would seem to be a reflection your personal interests.
 • On this page, we aren't putting anything on the "front page." Whether an FP candidate may end up being posted as a TFP on the Main Page depends on its fate here and, as far as I understand it, on choices made by a POTD coordinator. Sca (talk) 22:03, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
If you want proof that a lot of people play video games, then here's proof [2], according to this chart, 2.3 billion people play video games worldwide, and I find it very likely the a ton of people who visit the front page are active gamers and I could care less if it doesn't get featured on the front page, I just want the picture to get promoted the Featured Picture status. If you think Statista is unreliable, then here's another source that says that nearly 70 percent of Americans play video games [3] and a lot of our viewers come from United states, at least according to alexa internet [4]. Also, like I said before, Just because a picture we feature on the front page isn't interesting to most people, doesn't mean we aren't putting the picture on the front page. Featured Pictures are not determined by popularity, they are determined by the quality of the image. 344917661X (talk) 22:58, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── Assuming your source, Statista, is correct, less than a third (30.6 percent) of the 7.5+ billion population of Earth plays video games. U.S. residents who speak English as a first or second language, totaling 283 million, comprise a mere fraction (3.7 percent) of the global population. Your second source, Variety, says 67 percent of Americans play video games – which based on an English-speaking population of 283 million would be about 190 million, or 2.5 percent of the world population. In no way do these statistics indicate that a majority of readers visiting the Main Page of the English-language Wikipedia play video games.
Photos of modern electronic devices are, for the most part, inherently boring in terms of useful visual information, limiting their interest overwhelming to users of such devices. Sca (talk) 15:39, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Okay, there may be no proof that the majority of people visiting the main page play video games, but that is not a determining factor on wether or not a featured picture gets to go on the front page, like I said before, featured pictures are not determined by popularity, they are determined by the quality of the image. If you are going to provide an argument against this picture being promoted to featured article status, it has to be related to problems with the image and not how interesting it would be to most people. 344917661X (talk) 19:27, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
The majority of people aren't interested in specific bird species. The majority of people aren't interested in map projections. As per 344917661X, popularity is fairly irrelevant, and I feel that this specific discussion went a bit off-the-rails. ~Maplestrip/Mable (chat) 14:43, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Chris857 (talk) 16:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose I don't think this meets the FP criteria - it's nothing special. 15:42, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Care to elaborate? 344917661X (talk) 19:29, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
Just a rather boring photo that doesn't show it in portable mode. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:59, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
Would it have been better to nominate a set of this image + File:Nintendo-Switch-wJoyCons-BlRd-Standing-FL.jpg (by the same photographer). Chris857 (talk) 14:24, 19 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - high-quality image encyclopedically illustrating its subject. Very much the sort of thing Wikipedia needs. TSP (talk) 17:57, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - High quality image with high EV, as illustrated by its use on no less than five en.wiki articles, and on 26 different projects. Some of the objections above are getting a little silly. There is no requirement that something be a million years old and no longer available for commercial sale in order to be eligible for FP. Anyone is of course welcome to try to reach a community consensus on that point, but I don't think you're gonna get it. GMGtalk 19:04, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support on EV grounds, what more could you ask? Mattximus (talk) 16:19, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Aoba47 (talk) 02:06, 23 September 2018 (UTC)



MS Silja Serenade

Voting period ends on 26 Sep 2018 at 19:54:11 (UTC)

Original – The MS Silja Serenade navigating the Stockholm archipelago
Reason
Featured image on Commons, de.wp and pl.wp.
Articles in which this image appears
MS Silja Serenade
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Vehicles/Water
Creator
Wladyslaw
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 19:54, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Illustrates decent article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:06, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 09:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Nice, sharp shot. (And I've travelled on it... ;-) --Janke | Talk 12:42, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 03:17, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support very nice. --Pine 05:23, 25 September 2018 (UTC)



Mount Stuart House

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 19:39:11 (UTC)

Original – Mount Stuart House
Reason
Highly detailed, well executed composite of this category A listed building. It's debatable as to whether the image should be cropped to remove a bit of the foreground, but I'll leave that up to you to decide.
Articles in which this image appears
Mount Stuart House
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
Colin
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 19:39, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support No crop needed. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:31, 16 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Looks good to me, good EV, but no crop needed Mattximus (talk) 16:18, 22 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 09:35, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support Excellent photo with strong EV. The foreground seems useful to put the building in its proper context. Nick-D (talk) 11:15, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportWeak Oppose One of the trees slightly covers the building. 344917661X (talk) 20:09, 18 September 2018 (UTC)
    • But that appears to be a permanent feature? Nick-D (talk) 09:03, 20 September 2018 (UTC)
      • To avoid the tree, you'd have to use a different POV and it wouldn't be as effective. Charlesjsharp (talk) 08:20, 21 September 2018 (UTC)
I've changed my vote to support per comments above. 344917661X (talk) 17:43, 22 September 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 [5], [6], [7], [8], 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 [9]. Bammesk (talk) 02:10, 31 August 2018 (UTC)
    On a sidenote: the photo was published without a copyright notice in a 2016 book [10] [11] 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: [12]. 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: [13], [14](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)
  1. 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)
  • 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: [15], [16] 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)


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 September 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 September 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.

Wild Geranium

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 25 Sep 2018 at 14:00:58 (UTC)

Original – Wild Geranium flowers in spring in natural habitat, Massachusetts, United States
Reason
representative image, good resolution, shows intricate features of flower, photographed in natural habitat
Articles in which this image appears
Geranium maculatum, Geranium
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Plants/Flowers
Creator
PhotoDoc
  • Support as nominator – Hari Krishnan 14:00, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Shallow DOF. Sca (talk) 16:25, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - significant JPEG artifacts and chromatic aberration in addition to the shallow DOF pointed out by Sca. MER-C 19:10, 15 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose per previous The NMI User (talk) 09:29, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 14:43, 25 September 2018 (UTC)



African bush elephant and calf

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2018 at 11:05:48 (UTC)

OriginalAfrican bush elephants (Loxodonta africana) female with six-week-old baby.jpg in Matetsi Safari Area, Zimbabwe
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
African bush elephant
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 11:05, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – Pretty nice pachyderms, but shadowed head of mom is somewhat off-putting. Also, could be cropped from left. DOF? Sca (talk) 14:40, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 09:31, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:12, 23 September 2018 (UTC)



African buffalo

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 23 Sep 2018 at 10:52:33 (UTC)

Original – Male african buffalo (Syncerus caffer caffer) with attendant cattle egret. In the Chobe National Park, Botswana
Reason
High quality large image. FP on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
African buffalo
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals
Creator
Charlesjsharp
  • Support as nominatorCharlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. There's a little saturation on the egret but eh, whatever. It's not a deal breaker. MER-C 19:18, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
  • SupportBammesk (talk) 01:38, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 09:32, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Looks good, good EV. Mattximus (talk) 16:16, 22 September 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:African buffalo (Syncerus caffer caffer) male with cattle egret.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:12, 23 September 2018 (UTC)



Notre-Dame Basilica (Montreal)

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2018 at 11:14:49 (UTC)

Original – The interior of Notre-Dame Basilica in Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Alternative
Reason
I think we should have at least one featured picture of this subject and present these featured pictures on Commons (c:Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Notre-Dame Basilica Interior, Montreal, Canada - Diliff.jpg, c:Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/Notre-Dame de Montréal Basilica) for consideration.
Articles in which this image appears
Notre-Dame Basilica (Montreal)
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
Creator
David Iliff (main) and Diego Delso (alternative)
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 11:14, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment Original is too dark and alternative too cropped. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:57, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose – Much as I admire Iliff's work, I have to agree with Charles. And the alternative image looks like it might be oversaturated. Sca (talk) 14:41, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support I'm going to go against the crowd and support the original, but oppose alternate. It's an extremely well shot image, and the darkness does not bother me since it is likely to be an accurate representation of the interior of this basilica (which are often dark to begin with). So high quality and good EV. Mattximus (talk) 23:53, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
I'm going to think about that aspect.... Sca (talk) 13:57, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support orig. – On second thought, agree with Mattximus. – Sca (talk) 21:07, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support. Hey, I'm back! (not really, but I did get notified about this and thought it was worth giving my 2c). I have to say that I believe my image is more faithful to the interior (at least when I took it). Mine was taken in January in midwinter, so there is no ambient light from outside, whereas I understand Diego's image was taken in summer where there is ambient light entering the cathedral. So that partially explains the brightness difference. I do often take issue with how Diego processes his HDR images, I find they are often too bright and don't respect the natural tones of the scene and I think it is also the case here. One thing I would say is that my image actually looks a lot darker in the thumbnail than it does when viewed full screen. I think when viewed full screen it is low-key but all necessary detail clearly visible, with good dynamic range (for a non HDR image from 2006, anyway!). Ðiliff «» (Talk) 23:57, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
Hi, Dave. Sca (talk)
  • Support – I have been there and it was dark. I don't recall the shadows being as dark as this image, but human eyes do some auto HDR I guess. Would be nice if shadows were brighter but not a deal breaker. Good EV, good quality. Bammesk (talk) 02:04, 14 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - The NMI User (talk) 09:32, 17 September 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Notre-Dame Basilica Interior, Montreal, Canada - Diliff.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:38, 20 September 2018 (UTC)




Saturn

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 20 Sep 2018 at 08:43:40 (UTC)

Original – Saturn in natural color approaching equinox, photographed by Cassini in July 2008. The dot in the bottom left corner is Titan.
Reason
Great image, featured on Commons.
Articles in which this image appears
Saturn, Cassini–Huygens, etc.
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
Creator
NASA / JPL / Space Science Institute
  • Support as nominatorThe NMI User (talk) 08:43, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – Delicious! --Janke | Talk 09:39, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist File:Saturn from Cassini Orbiter (2004-10-06).jpg and replace it with this image -- same subject, essentially same composition but this image has superior EV due to the presence of moons. The nominated image has supplanted File:Saturn from Cassini Orbiter (2004-10-06).jpg (which is now relegated to the Saturn navbox) in many of the articles it appears in, including Saturn itself. MER-C 10:53, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
    If consensus is not to delist and replace, I support this image as a second preference. MER-C 14:16, 17 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - lower resolution than the other mentioned by MER-C, but appears crisper and includes 5? moons. High EV. Chris857 (talk) 17:06, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support new nomination, oppose delist and replace. The earlier FP has plenty of educational and technical quality by today's standards, and unlike the new nomination it shows shadows on the planet's surface from the rings. --Pine 19:25, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose (revised vote) – as is. File size is 325KB, it is too small for a 4613x2233 pixel image. But conditional Support if the 30.9MB TIFF original here is converted to jpeg (much larger file size) and uploaded to Commons. Bammesk (talk) 01:54, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Done - now in highest jpeg quality, file size now > 2 MB. --Janke | Talk 08:14, 11 September 2018 (UTC)
      • SupportBammesk (talk) 01:02, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist and replace per MER-C. We shouldn't have multiple FPs if one is no longer used in any article outside of the navbox. --Paul_012 (talk) 11:56, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Changing to support, since both images now used, per Bammesk's comments. --Paul_012 (talk) 03:51, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Delist and replace Agree with Paul_012, we should not have 2 featured pictures of the exact same thing. Mattximus (talk) 21:51, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Comment – I added the image File:Saturn from Cassini Orbiter (2004-10-06).jpg to the two articles listed above. I am for keeping it as FP if the image stays in the articles. According to JPL's description [17], it is the highest resolution (most detailed) image of the planet-and-rings that has been produced. Also 1) it shows the very faint outer F-ring, which is not visible in the nom image, 2) it shows the strong shadows cast on the planet by the rings (upper hemisphere). Bammesk (talk) 03:22, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
    • Comment – doesn't look like the image I added to the above articles File:Saturn from Cassini Orbiter (2004-10-06).jpg is remaining in those articles. I will work on finding the image a home. I suggest a separate delist nomination at a later time (say a month or so). Bammesk (talk) 03:24, 18 September 2018 (UTC)

Promoted File:Saturn during Equinox.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 15:34, 20 September 2018 (UTC)


Hong Kong Island at Dusk

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 17 Sep 2018 at 21:56:28 (UTC)

Original – A comprehensive view of Hong Kong Island at dusk, from Victoria Harbour. Observed from the left are the several core business districts of the city: Wan Chai, Admiralty, Central. This skyline includes some of the greatest works of architecture and civil engineering of the 20th century, with notable structures such as Bank of China Tower, HSBC Building, International Finance Centre, and HKCEC.
Reason
A stunning image showing the iconic skyline of Hong Kong Island at dusk. It is a technically well done with perfect stitching and exposure through the entire panorama. This image exemplifies high encyclopedic value, showcasing the world's most impressive works of architecture, civil engineering, and urban planning. The image has appeared in a featured article and a featured list.
Articles in which this image appears
Hong Kong, Victoria Harbour, List of tallest buildings in Hong Kong
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Panorama
Creator
temppic

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 22:44, 17 September 2018 (UTC)



The Nine Sovereigns at Windsor for the funeral of King Edward VII

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2018 at 22:31:05 (UTC)

Reason
Encyclopedic image of largest gathering of monarchs in European history.
Articles in which this image appears
Funeral of King Edward VII
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Royalty and nobility
Creator
W. & D. Downey
  • Support as nominatorPotosinoVeracruzano (talk) 22:31, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • OpposeCriteria 2, height is below the 1500 pixel minimum resolution. Bammesk (talk) 03:40, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose - Too low resolution, lower than the minimum. Mattximus (talk) 14:49, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
What a lot of gold braid. Too bad all those mustachioed monarchs, many of whom were related one way or another, couldn't have agreed – four years before WWI – never to go to war. Sca (talk) 21:30, 9 September 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 00:09, 17 September 2018 (UTC)



Crucibulum spinosum

Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 16 Sep 2018 at 19:46:31 (UTC)

OriginalCrucibulum spinosum
Reason
Not sure how far standards have risen since the last time I was here way back when, but this photo was unanimously featured on Commons last year.
Articles in which this image appears
Crucibulum spinosum, List of the Cenozoic life of Florida
FP category for this image
Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Molluscs
Creator
H. Zell
  • Support as nominatorMER-C 19:46, 6 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support – article is too short, but image has EV and good quality. User:MER-C if you are familiar with the subject, can the article be improved? perhaps the reference link updated? Bammesk (talk) 04:17, 7 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Great EV, but I also share concerns at the article which is just a stub. Mattximus (talk) 14:52, 8 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Support - Per Bammesk and Mattximus. --The NMI User (talk) 03:17, 10 September 2018 (UTC)
  • Oppose Stub article. Charlesjsharp (talk) 15:58, 10 September 2018 (UTC)

Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 00:08, 17 September 2018 (UTC)



Suspended nominations

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