Commons:Quality images candidates/Archives June 05 2017

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

Consensual review

[edit]

File:Annapurna_Uphill.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Uphill: Annapurna. (By Supermaanis) --Biplab Anand 09:00, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Oppose Where is the focus? I can't see anything sharp. --Peulle 10:06, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support - It's a big file. I think it's sharp enough. -- Ikan Kekek 10:15, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose I don't think,per Peulle --Livioandronico2013 21:17, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Per Ikan Kekek. --Manfred Kuzel 03:53, 5 June 2017 (UTC)
Total: 1 support (excluding the nominator), 2 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 17:07, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Pousse_de_cocotier.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Coconut (cocos nucifera) sprout near the mouth of the river Ahoa (Tubuai, French Polynesia). By User:Avatea --Thomas Linard 23:41, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support Good quality. PumpkinSky 00:17, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Sorry, I disagree. Wrong focus and CAs. --Tsungam 08:01, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Maybe no FP, but IMHO enough quality for QI. Thanks. MarcoAurelio 16:47, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Terrible --Livioandronico2013 20:10, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Total unsharp, very poor quality, sorry. Btw, really interesting object -- George Chernilevsky 06:32, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per George, --W.carter 09:21, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose The subject is not in focus and there are chromatic aberrations, sorry but this is far from QI level.--Peulle 11:09, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support per MarcoAurelio. --Manfred Kuzel 09:37, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose per others. Ikan Kekek 21:14, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
  • PumpkinSky, Tsungam, Chernilevsky, Peulle : Thank you for your critical analysis. I uploaded this photograph mostly because there is not any coconut sprout picture on Wikimedia Commons. Next time I go to Tubuai I will try to take better photos of coconut sprouts, taking into account your critiques. Avatea 11:09, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Please do. We need good pictures on Commons. :) --Peulle 13:14, 3 June 2017 (UTC)
Total: 3 support (excluding the nominator), 6 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 17:08, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Anas_platyrhynchos_(Mallard)_pair_of_ducklings.jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination Mallard (Anas platyrhynchos), pair of ducklings swimming --PumpkinSky 23:18, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Decline
  •  Support So cute! DoF a little short but both heads with water drops and all are good and sharp and most of the plumage on the nearest duckling. Good quality. --W.carter 10:09, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Left hand bird out of focus. Charlesjsharp 22:07, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose - Sorry, I agree with Charles. -- Ikan Kekek 06:48, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Comment We promote photos of multiple flowers with only one flower in focus, why do both birds here have to in perfect focus here? --W.carter 09:14, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
  • I think because this is clearly a photo of both ducks, not of one duck with the other one just happening to be there. The point in those flower photos is to focus on one flower, making the photo a portrait of just that flower, with everything else as background. -- Ikan Kekek 09:37, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Oppose Per others. The photo attempts to portray two birds and then both should be in focus.--Peulle 11:15, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support per Cart. Jkadavoor 04:24, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 3 oppose → Declined   --Peulle 17:10, 4 June 2017 (UTC)

File:Loftsstue Mellom Rue (2).jpg

[edit]

  • Nomination 1770s Loft house from Mellom Rue, Hol, Norway. --Peulle 17:43, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
  • Promotion
  •  Comment I am not sure, but my impression is that there is some CA in the sky, can you check it? --Zoppo59 20:01, 28 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support For me good enough as QI despite CAs, please discuss!--Zoppo59 14:22, 29 May 2017 (UTC)
 Comment You don't need to challenge your own review; if you think it's good enough, you can set it to "promote" and someone else can take it to CR if they disagree. :) As far as the CA are concerned, I did use the "remove CA" command in Photoshop, but there are traces of the removal because of the difficult light conditions through the trees. If that makes it not good enough, I have no problem with that. Looking forward to hearing what others think.--Peulle 07:56, 30 May 2017 (UTC)
  •  Support Good enough for me for QI.--Manfred Kuzel 04:47, 31 May 2017 (UTC)
Total: 2 support (excluding the nominator), 0 oppose → Promoted   --Jkadavoor 04:00, 5 June 2017 (UTC)