Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives November 03 2023

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Zicht_op_de_Piz_S-chalambert_vanuit_Val_Sinestra_21-09-2023._(d.j.b)_02.jpg

[edit]

Running total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Decline?   --Ikan Kekek 21:23, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

File:20230518_St._Jakob_Wasserburg_am_Inn_04.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination A fountain with statue from 1988 outside the church St. Jakob in Wasserburg am Inn --FlocciNivis 17:57, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
    The white panel on left spoils the composition. A portrait crop of the statue alone will be better IMO --Tagooty 03:17, 20 October 2023 (UTC)
    Agree with Tagooty. Either crop the statue alone, or just cut off the white panel (so that the statue would be on the left side of the remaining image), and it would be really good. --Plozessor 10:53, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
     Oppose Poor composition (disturbing panel) --Plozessor 05:24, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
     Support Actually, only the technical quality is assessed here at QI; at FP, the composition is important. --Ermell 20:43, 28 October 2023 (UTC)
 Comment I disagree. The header of this page ("Quality image candidates") says:
Composition and lighting: The arrangement of the subject within the image should contribute to the image. Foreground and background objects should not be distracting.
And at least for my taste, that panel is distracting. --Plozessor 07:42, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support The panel may be incongruous, but it doesn't ruin the composition, anyway. Good quality. -- Ikan Kekek 06:30, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Agree with Plozessor. Move in tighter and get a clean image of the statue. Alternative, crop tightly if there is sufficient resolution. --GRDN711 14:36, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose No composition. --Smial 21:48, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Unfavorable composition; the wall on the left is very annoying. I would have photographed the statue with its base in portrait format or cropped the existing image to portrait format and brightened the statue a little. Then it would be a nice picture and maybe also a QI. -- Spurzem 09:49, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
    Please look at the cropped version. -- Spurzem (talk) 11:20, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
I would definitely support the cropped version as a QI! --Plozessor (talk) 13:06, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 08:41, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Red_Telephone_Box_in_Etampes_(Essonne).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Red Telephone Box in Etampes (Essonne,France) -- Florent Abel 23:06, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Decline
    Quite unnatural perspective, was that intentional? Should be easy to fix, then it would be a really good picture. --Plozessor 05:05, 26 October 2023 (UTC)
    It is not easy to fix perfectly, but I tried to do it a bit. We should ask whether it is okay now. -- Spurzem 19:08, 27 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Comment Please do not send anything to CR without a supporting vote or an opposing vote with which you disagree. --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk)
  •  Oppose --Smial 21:51, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Too weird-looking, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek 23:37, 29 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per Ikan. --LexKurochkin 08:50, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Hallo Robert Flogaus-Faust, where is the problem? I was amazed that this image was featured for QI and tried to improve it a bit. The result was not good or hardly better than the original. So I asked what others think about it. Best regards -- Spurzem 09:41, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
     Info My comment was just a reminder of Commons:Quality_images_candidates#How_to_review. These are the sentences: "Please only send things to consensual review that have been reviewed as promoted/declined. If, as a reviewer, you cannot make a decision, add your comments but leave the candidate on this page." --Robert Flogaus-Faust (talk) 18:12, 30 October 2023 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 08:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)

File:Church_of_the_Holy_Innocents_Hoboken_November_2021.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination: Church of the Holy Innocents and view of Hoboken skyline to the north. --King of Hearts 11:29, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
  • Review
  •  Oppose Not a QI of the church in my eyes, I can hardly see it --Poco a poco 18:37, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support It's a QI of a view, even if it might not be a good VI of the church because trees block our view of some of it. -- Ikan Kekek 18:43, 23 October 2023 (UTC)
  • I've edited the file description to more accurately describe what is actually shown in the image. --King of Hearts 00:34, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support Good image quality. I guess the "composition" quality is somehow subjective; for me it's ok - the picture shows the church and its surroundings. --Plozessor 05:03, 24 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose It may be very difficult to photograph this church favorably, but a better photo than this should be possible. The lighting is extremely poor, making it difficult to see the church. For me it is not a quality image. - Spurzem 09:37, 25 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, too much of the church is obstructed. --Palauenc05 11:06, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
  •  Support QI in my eyes.--Ermell 20:51, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 08:40, 2 November 2023 (UTC)