Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives September 28 2016

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

Consensual review[edit]

File:Villa_Carlotta_3469.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Villa Carlotta --Hamster28 07:00, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Oppose The sky is overexposed, is there a way to get back the detail reducing the highlights? Poco a poco 20:25, 13 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support Acceptable, Light but not burned out. Overall high enough quality imo.--ArildV 17:52, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Support If the both of you can not decide: discuss--Tobias "ToMar" Maier 16:54, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Comment I was about to say the same; let's go to CR. @Hamster28: , please have a look at the review and see if you wish to make any changes to the image.--Peulle 17:31, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose → Promoted   --Hubertl 19:21, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

File:Dahlia 'Happy Days' in Jardin des Plantes de Toulouse 03.jpg[edit]

  • Nomination Dahlia 'Happy Days' in Jardin des Plantes de Toulouse. By --Tournasol7 21:05, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality -- Spurzem 22:05, 23 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, I disagree, nothing is sharp --A.Savin 11:27, 24 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per A.Savin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:37, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I agree; the DoF is not deep enough so there is very few things sharp in this shot.--Peulle 09:19, 25 September 2016 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Hubertl 06:15, 27 September 2016 (UTC)