Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives July 24 2016

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Lachsölkapsel.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Fish oil capsules --A,Ocram 18:17, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Support Good quality. --Poco a poco 19:57, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • {{o}} I disagree, please remove the dustspots and the hair! --Hubertl 21:28, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

 Comment Haar, und soweit ich es erkennen konnte, auch die Sensorflecken entfernt. Gruss --Nightflyer 22:06, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

  •  Support --Ralf Roletschek 22:19, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Nice and clean now. :) -- W.carter 22:25, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support --Hubertl 03:39, 23 July 2016 (UTC)
Total: 4 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 01:56, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

File:Rapsfeld bei Fulda.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Rapeseed field near Fulda --Verum 00:19, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment The sign has two copyrighted logos and there is no indication on the sign that the photo on it is a free picture. W.carter 10:38, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
    •  Comment Erstens fällt das unter Panoramafreiheit und zweitens fehlt den Logos Schöpfungshöhe. --Verum 11:09, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
      •  Comment Sorry, the sign is the central point of the photo and therefore not just a random part of a panorama. One of the logos may fall under the originality clause but not the other. There is also the photo. W.carter 11:23, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
        •  Comment I disagree - Löschantrag wegen Substanzlosigkeit gelöscht. --Ralf Roletschek 12:14, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
          •  Comment If the field the the main motif, there is plenty of that without any signs. The composition revolves around the sign and that is why the copyright can't be ignored. I welcome a discussion of this so we know in the future. W.carter 12:19, 20 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support --Ralf Roletschek 22:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 01:55, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

File:PL - Mielec - rzeźba Gołąb (Bernard Lewiński), park Oborskich - Kroton 002.JPG[edit]

  • Nomination "Gołąb" ("dove"), sculpture by Bernard Lewiński, Oborski Family Park in Mielec 3 --Kroton 20:25, 9 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment Generally good, but is too green, or it is just my monitor? --C messier 12:16, 13 July 2016 (UTC)
  • ✓ Done degreened --Kroton 06:42, 16 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment Kroton, that wasn't a rhetorical question. I believe more opinions are needed as far as WB is concerned in this photo. --C messier 10:21, 17 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  CommentSending to CR for more opinions by request of Kroton. --Peulle 13:54, 19 July 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support There is nothing wrong with the WB in this photo. I've checked against scratches and white bird droppings on the sculpture. It really is this green due to algae growing on it. This may be bad maintanance of the sculpture but not a bad photo. Try taking pics in moist Scottish grave yards where everything is covered in green algaes... W.carter 12:57, 21 July 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 18:29, 23 July 2016 (UTC)