Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives December 03 2019

Consensual review

edit

File:В_процессе_создания.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination NUST MISIS scientists have developed a universal protective filter against ultraviolet radiation by modifying zinc oxide nanoparticles. By User:Sgnuskov --Tomer T 14:02, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Oppose Seems overexposed. --Steindy 14:55, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Good quality. --Chenspec 21:38, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Steindy. Whites are too bright and run together. -- Ikan Kekek 02:06, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose definitely too bright --Milseburg 10:42, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per others.--Peulle 18:05, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above --Andrew J.Kurbiko 23:41, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 5 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 10:48, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

File:العلم_العراقي.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination Liberation Square, Baghdad. By User:Mondalawy --Andrew J.Kurbiko 08:04, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
      Oppose Sorry! No discription given and the person is not sharp enough. --Steindy 10:47, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
    I translated it from Arabic. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 11:37, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Question - I'm considering whether this is less of a posed portrait than the photo of George Adrian Horridge that's being considered above, and therefore, whether as street photography, we would be justified in accepting a bit less sharpness from this composition. I don't know, but I open this up for discussion. -- Ikan Kekek 06:29, 30 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 0 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 10:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Rote_Moschee_IMG_1371.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination Rote Moschee im Schloßgarten von Schwetzingen, Baden-Würtemberg, Deutschland.--Fischer.H 17:42, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline Good quality --Michielverbeek 18:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
      Oppose I disagre for now. It seems to be tilted. Btw is heavily downscaled --Podzemnik 20:04, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I'm fine with the perspective, but the image has very low detail. A landscape or architectural image should have at least six MPixels nowadays to be a QI, better more. --Smial 09:42, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per Smial. Less than great quality at this size is not a QI in 2019, considering the other photos that are. -- Ikan Kekek 10:01, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 10:47, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Absberg_Kellergasse_52.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination: Objekt in der Kellergasse in Absberg (Niederösterreich). --Manfred Kuzel 06:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review
      Support Good quality. --XRay 07:05, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
      Oppose I disagree. Patterns at the door. Sorry. --Ermell 07:42, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 10:46, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Absberg_Kellergasse_41.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination: Objekt in der Kellergasse in Absberg (Niederösterreich). --Manfred Kuzel 06:59, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review
  •   Support Good quality.--Famberhorst 07:13, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. Patterns at the right wall. Sorry. --Ermell 07:43, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 10:45, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

File:2019_Strzał_z_broni_czarnoprochowej_2.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination Shot off a black powder weapon 2 --Jacek Halicki 01:21, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •   Support Good quality --Llez 05:45, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose I disagree. Below 2 MP. --Steindy 10:09, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose Below minimum size requirement.--Peulle 14:32, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Size is 1,906*1.08 and that is just above 2MB, so I cannot agree with the argument. however I cannot deny it is a small photo. --Michielverbeek 18:30, 28 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose It is quite soft. For that small size, just about the minimum, I would expect it to be sharper. --Aristeas 09:25, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Oppose per above --~~~~
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 4 oppose →   Declined   --Peulle 10:44, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Absberg_Kellergasse_57.jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination: Objekt in der Kellergasse in Absberg (Niederösterreich). --Manfred Kuzel 06:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Review   Support Good quality. -- Johann Jaritz 07:11, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
      Oppose I disagree. Patterns in the dark areas. Sorry. --Ermell 13:56, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Inconclusive result after 8 consensual review days   --Peulle 10:43, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

File:Австралійська_райка_велетенська_(Litoria_infrafrenata).jpg

edit

 

  • Nomination The white-lipped tree frog (Litoria infrafrenata) in the Kyiv zoo --Almanahe~ukwiki 16:11, 19 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •   Oppose Too blurry. --Andrew J.Kurbiko 23:32, 23 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support Shaprness and focus look good to me, so I'm marking this for discussion. --Bobulous 12:44, 24 November 2019 (UTC)
  •   Support I agree with Bobulous. --Robert Flogaus-Faust 21:23, 27 November 2019 (UTC)
  • Weak   Support Somewhat low DOF and a little bit overexposed, but "good enough". --Smial (talk)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 1 oppose →   Promoted George Chernilevsky 06:20, 2 December 2019 (UTC)