Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives August 10 2023

From Wikimedia Commons, the free media repository
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Work_boat_Hevrøy_in_Austevoll_02.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Work boat Hevrøy --Vasmar1 11:10, 27 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
    The blurred foliage forms a nice frame, but I find too much on the right. Cropping should help. Try a 4:3 aspect ratio. --Tagooty 04:08, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
    Thanks! New version uploaded. Better? --Vasmar1 13:45, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
     Support Yes, better. --Tagooty 15:17, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Sorry - too much fuzzy greenery and water; not large enough display of the main topic - the ship. --GRDN711 01:16, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support I don't love the blurred foliage, either, at least at full size, but that's artistic license, not a matter of poor execution. -- Ikan Kekek 08:21, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Even zoomed in to about 6 Mpixels image size good enough. --Smial 12:36, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:24, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

File:AA_VARTA_battery-side_PNr°0782.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination A AA battery by VARTA --D-Kuru 08:47, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose Looks overprocessed --Poco a poco 19:02, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  • @Poco a poco: What do you mean with overprocessed? --D-Kuru 10:11, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  • To be honest, it looks better now, probably it was not loaded completely when I checked it. I would  Support now. Poco a poco 11:27, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Looks good, but maybe you could reduce the highlights at the top of the battery? Vasmar1 16:34, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:26, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Barum_Karl_der_Große_Straße_09_001_2023_04_02-Verbessert-RR.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Sacristan and school building, built from 1769 to 1923, northeast side
    --F. Riedelio 06:05, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion  Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 06:18, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose I disagree (sharpness/dof; noticeable in the trees in the foreground and background as well as the house itself) --Аныл Озташ 12:17, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Acceptable to me. Аныл Озташ, I assume you voted against and that's why this was sent to CR, but why don't I see a vote by you? -- Ikan Kekek 08:23, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
@Ikan Kekek: I added the comment via QIVoter helper. Once a pro or con vote has already been cast, no further vote can be cast on it, only the discussion can be started as a comment. --Аныл Озташ 13:48, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
  • weak  Support. Sharpness is good enough for a decent A4-print, but probably overexposed by half a stop, somewhat washed out colours in the brighter parts of the picture. But I think that is just tolerable. --Smial 12:32, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 20:55, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Lake_near_Sortavala.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Lake near Sortavala, Republic of Karelia. By User:Anders98en --Florstein 06:32, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  • Underexposed. --Kallerna 09:10, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality. --MoulinoisHy 19:31, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Still underexposed. --Kallerna 04:04, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
  • @Kallerna: New version uploaded. --Florstein 13:01, 5 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Probably a bit underexposed still, but a beautiful composition, and I think it's within an acceptable artistic range of exposure. This is really quite painterly. -- Ikan Kekek 08:25, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:26, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Rat_Snake_photographed_at_Chobhar,_Kathmandu.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination: Rat Snake photographed at Chobhar, Kathmandu --Shadow Ayush 16:22, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Review
     Support Good quality. --Conny Duck 16:49, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Sorry, bur the categorisation should be improved. Tournasol7 18:40, 30 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for now. Which species (or at least which genus) is this? --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:59, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good quality, it might be a zamenis longissimus. --Anil Ö. (talk) 20:23, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
I had wondered about it at first, but I was probably wrong. It may be a ptyas mucosa, but I don't want to make any more assumptions at this point in time. Perhaps it could be assigned to a appropriate category and trust that someone can correctly identify and categorise it accordingly. --Аныл Озташ 23:07, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
This is a good idea. However, the genus should be identified for images of living things before they qualify as quality images. It is uncertain whether or when such an unidentified animal can be identified. Without a proper ID, the value of an image is regrettably low even if the image is good. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:40, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  SupportErmell 22:17, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Question So identification and categorization issues have no importance any more for assigning QI status? Of course, they are fixable, just like dust spots or CAs. So should these also be ignored? --Robert Flogaus-Faust 23:21, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I think they still matter. -- Ikan Kekek 08:31, 6 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:19, 9 August 2023 (UTC)

File:Innotrans_2018,_Berlin_(_1070476).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Bemo Rail BRDE-80 at Innotrans 2018, Berlin --MB-one 10:28, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
  • Promotion
     Support Good quality. --Jakubhal 10:52, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment. Unfortunate lighting and disturbing information sheets. I am surprised that this is a QI. -- Spurzem 12:03, 29 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment It is not yet a QI, but if you wish to oppose it you should do that instead of adding a comment. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 12:48, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support In this case, I wouldn't be so harsh in my judgment, since this is obviously a photo from an exhibition or trade show. In the dark parts of the picture there are also still enough details visible. --Smial 16:10, 31 July 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Strange left crop, in my opinion. I understand the competing elements, but I don't like the upper left corner, so no supporting vote from me and I might oppose. -- Ikan Kekek 07:25, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose for that reason. Sorry if that's a little nitpicky, but it bugs me. -- Ikan Kekek 05:44, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Do the both info panels on the locomotive differently have differently coloured text or is it CA on the one on the length side? --Аныл Озташ 00:06, 4 August 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Robert Flogaus-Faust 07:20, 9 August 2023 (UTC)