Featured pictures are images that add significantly to articles, either by illustrating article content particularly well, or being eye-catching to the point where users will want to read its accompanying article. Taking the adage that "a picture is worth a thousand words", the images featured on Wikipedia:Featured pictures should illustrate a Wikipedia article in such a way as to add significantly to that article, according to the featured picture criteria.
If you believe an image should be featured, create a subpage (use the "For Nominations" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section. For promotion, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers in support and the consensus is in its favor, it can be added to the Wikipedia:Featured pictures list. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator and/or creator of the image; however, anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. All users may comment. However, only those who have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and with at least 100 edits will be included in the numerical count. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. Nominations started in December are given three extra days, due to the holidays slowing down activity here. The archive contains all opinions and comments collected for candidate nominations and their nomination results. If you nominate an image here, please consider also uploading and nominating it at Commons to help ensure that the pictures can be used not just in the English Wikipedia but on all other Wikimedia projects as well.
A featured picture can be nominated for delisting if you feel it no longer lives up to featured picture standards. You may also request a featured picture be replaced with a superior image. Create a subpage (use the "For Delists" field, below) and add the subpage to the current nominations section. Please leave a note on the talk page of the original FPC nominator (and creator/uploader, if appropriate) to let them know the delisting is being debated. The user may be able to address the issues and avoid the delisting of the picture. For delisting, if an image is listed here for ten days with five or more reviewers supporting a delist or replace, and the consensus is in its favor, it will be delisted from Wikipedia:Featured pictures. Consensus is generally regarded to be a two-third majority in support, including the nominator. Note that anonymous votes are generally disregarded, as are opinions of sockpuppets. However, images are sometimes delisted despite having fewer than five in support of their removal, and there is currently no consensus on how best to handle delist closures, except that:.If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted. If it is added to articles during the nomination, at least one week's stability is required for the nomination to be closed as "Kept". The nomination may be suspended if a week hasn't yet passed to give the rescue a chance. Outside of the nominator, all voters are expected to have been on Wikipedia for 25 days and to have made a minimum of 100 edits. If necessary, decisions about close candidacies will be made on a case-by-case basis. As with regular nominations, delist nominations are given three extra days to run if started in December.
|
Featured picture tools:
|
Step 1:
Evaluate Evaluate the merit of a nomination against the featured picture criteria. Most users reference terms from this page when evaluating nominations. |
Step 2:
Create a subpage
To create a subpage of Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates for your nomination, add a title for the image you want to nominate in the field below (e.g., Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Labrador Retriever) and click the "Create new nomination" button.
To create a subpage for your delist, add a title for the image you want to delist/replace in the field below and click the "Create new delist nomination" button. |
Step 3:
Transclude and link Transclude the newly created subpage to the Featured picture candidate list (). |
How to comment for Candidate Images
How to comment for Delist Images
Editing candidates
Is my monitor adjusted correctly?
|
- To see recent changes, .
FPCs needing feedback |
---|
Current nominations
Frances Benjamin Johnston
Voting period ends on 18 May 2016 at 02:02:38 (UTC)
- Reason
- One of the most characterful self-portraits I've seen. Interesting background, that you can spend hours looking over (which is good, as this took weeks)
- Articles in which this image appears
- Frances Benjamin Johnston
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Frances Benjamin Johnston; restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:02, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Very nice. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:02, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support, yep. Brandmeistertalk 07:17, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Zounds, showing leg and smoking a ciggie, too! Interesting pix in her article.
- Adam, I'm curious: In relation to the George Washington Carver nom. (4/26), how would you evaluate her photo of Booker T. Washington? Sca (talk) 15:16, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Well, it's featured here and on Commons. Guessing at your underlying question, I'd ask you to remember that people vary in skin tone. Booker T. Washington is a much lighter-skinned African-American than Carver is, which is pretty readily demonstratable. Booker shouldn't be darkened to look like Carver any more than Carver should be lightened. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:52, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
The Thief of Bagdad
Voting period ends on 17 May 2016 at 21:52:14 (UTC)
- Reason
- One slight crease, but otherwise good. Those were the days of unphotoshopped film posters...
- Articles in which this image appears
- The Thief of Bagdad (1924 film)
- FP category for this image
- Artwork/Others
- Creator
- The H.C. Miner Litho. Co.
- Support as nominator – Brandmeistertalk 21:52, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - JPG artefacting is problematic. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:43, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- At 1.52 MB filesize I didn't expect them. Maybe there's an uncompressed version somewhere... Brandmeistertalk 07:32, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Wizard Island
Voting period ends on 16 May 2016 at 17:27:13 (UTC)
- Reason
- High resolution, high quality scenic photo
- Articles in which this image appears
- Wizard Island, Tourist attractions near Portland, Oregon
- FP category for this image
- Landscapes
- Creator
- Jacopo Werther
- Support as nominator After viewing the Crater Lake image and article, I came across this photo and was inspired to nominate it as well. This is my first FP nomination. – 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 17:27, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Welcome to FPC! This image has a few issues, some of which could be corrected. I have made notations in the commons file indicating places which would need some cleanup: there is a hair/fiber in the sky, several large dust spots in the water, and a few also in the sky. The two main issues for me is that at full size the landscape details are too soft and the single tree in the foreground is too much of a distraction from the landscape itself. That said, I must regretfully oppose.--Godot13 (talk) 20:50, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Blues also look oversaturated, to me at least. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:08, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Agree with oppose above. --Janke | Talk 07:03, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Comment – Crater Lake must be one of the most-photographed nature scenes in the world. Consequently, the bar is set pretty high for Criterion No. 5. Sca (talk) 15:22, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Oleg (dance)
Voting period ends on 16 May 2016 at 04:28:27 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality image of a gorgeous Balinese dance. Article is in decent shape too.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Oleg (dance) +2
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
- Creator
- Chris Woodrich
- Support as nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:28, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Jobas (talk) 21:20, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:08, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Godot13 (talk) 08:24, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Saint-Étienne-du-Mont
Voting period ends on 15 May 2016 at 05:40:13 (UTC)
- Reason
- Diliff does it again. A nice interior of a famous church in Paris. Good EV.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Saint-Étienne-du-Mont
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
- Creator
- Diliff
- Support as nominator – Étienne Dolet (talk) 05:40, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- Why not nominate as a set? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 07:56, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
-
- Don't know how. Plus, I only found two pictures. Is that suffice enough to be conisdered a set? Étienne Dolet (talk) 08:08, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- The composition of this photo is unfortunately dominated by the chairs to my eye. Nick-D (talk) 08:58, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Jobas (talk) 21:17, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support Gives a nice idea of the use of space and the complicated structure. Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:32, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Saint-Étienne-du-Mont
Voting period ends on 15 May 2016 at 05:41:42 (UTC)
- Reason
- Diliff does it again. A nice interior of a famous church in Paris. Good EV.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Saint-Étienne-du-Mont
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors
- Creator
- Diliff
- Support as nominator – Étienne Dolet (talk) 05:41, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Fine detail of what must be an unusual architectural style. Sca (talk) 14:48, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Good EV with a wow-factor as well.--Godot13 (talk) 04:41, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Gorgeous, high-quality photo.--3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 19:38, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Jobas (talk) 21:13, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
Ratna Moetoe Manikam
Voting period ends on 14 May 2016 at 10:38:07 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality magazine advertisement, for the last film produced by Java Industrial Film (production was apparently not finished when the Japanese occupied the Dutch East Indies in March 1942, though we should be careful taking Tan Tjoei Hock at his word)
- Articles in which this image appears
- Ratna Moetoe Manikam
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Entertainment
- Creator
- Java Industrial Film, restored by Chris Woodrich
- Support as nominator – — Chris Woodrich (talk) 10:38, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – quality meets FP requirements, EV established through standalone article. SSTflyer 11:48, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Good quality of an obscure film, but the article is well written. So quality and EV are both there. Mattximus (talk) 22:31, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Jobas (talk) 21:10, 7 May 2016 (UTC)
- Since we can't expect a historical document to be improved in quality, Support. If Indonesia used a rather cheap half-tone for its movie posters, we get what we get, aye? =) Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:30, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
- This and the previous Poesaka Terpendam advertisement were both much better quality than the mid-1950s prints. In 1950 or so Bintang Surabaja used decent halftoning, much different than what ended up being used later. Check out the full resolution at Selamat Berdjuang, Masku!. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:53, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Arena Glacier, Hope Bay, Antarctica
Voting period ends on 13 May 2016 at 03:38:10 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality, high EV (two-image set for perspective).
- Original
- Arena Glacier, first mapped in 1948 and 1955, flows into Hope Bay on the Trinity Peninsula of Antarctica. The first image, shot from a ship at a distance, shows the glacier flowing into Hope Bay. The second image, shot from a moving zodiac approaching the glacial outlet, provides size perspective.
- Articles in which these images appear
- Arena Glacier
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Natural phenomena/Others
- Creator
- Godot13
Arena glacier size and perspective | ||
---|---|---|
|
|
- Support as nominator – Godot13 (talk) 03:38, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Jobas (talk) 17:59, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – landscape image
(undecided about the close-up). Bammesk (talk) 02:43, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
-
- The connection between the two images is not obvious, even when the landscape is displayed at say 1200px wide (a typical laptop size). Perhaps the article is the best place to show size perspective. BTW the landscape image is awesome. Bammesk (talk) 03:42, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- The close-up/detail image is linked in commons to the landscape. A box is drawn around the area of the closeup with a link. Thank you for the kind words about the landscape image...--Godot13 (talk) 04:39, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Prefer the landscape image, though I don't mind the close-up. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 08:57, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Landscape. (Some of us certainly do get around!) Sca (talk) 13:11, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support Good photos with strong EV. The zodiac photo is particularly good, and useful. Nick-D (talk) 09:00, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Pope Pius VI
Voting period ends on 12 May 2016 at 17:46:34 (UTC)
- Reason
- High Ev as lead image, very good scan of the painting
- Articles in which this image appears
- Pope Pius VI, Papal conclave, 1774–75, Pompeo Batoni, Napoleon and the Catholic Church
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Religious figures
- Creator
- Pompeo Batoni
- Support as nominator – Spongie555 (talk) 17:46, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Jobas (talk) 17:57, 3 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support You aren't getting a better shot than this. Staxringold talkcontribs 03:52, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk) 02:05, 8 May 2016 (UTC)
Nominations — to be closed
Nominations in this category are older than ten days and are to be closed. New votes will no longer be accepted.
Older nominations requiring additional input from users
These nominations have been moved here because consensus is impossible to determine without additional input from those who participated in the discussion. Usually this is because there was more than one edit of the image available, and no clear preference for one of them was determined. If you voted on these images previously, please update your vote to specify which edit(s) you are supporting.
Closing procedure
A script is available that automates the majority of these tasks: User:Jujutacular/closeFPC
When NOT promoted, perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
- {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
-
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
-
- {{FPCresult|Not promoted| }} --~~~~
- Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} to the top of the section.
- Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the May archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
- If the nominator is new to FPC, consider placing {{subst:NotpromotedFPC|Image name}} on their talk page. To avoid overuse, do not use the template when in doubt.
- If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.
When promoted, perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/subpage:
- {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
-
- Replace FILENAME.JPG with the name of the file that was promoted. It should show up as:
-
- Promoted File:FILENAME.JPG
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
-
- {{FPCresult|Promoted|File:FILENAME.JPG}} --~~~~
- Add the image to:
- Template:Announcements/New featured content - newest on top, remove the oldest so that 15 are listed at all times.
- Wikipedia:Goings-on - newest on bottom.
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs - newest on top.
- Add the image to the proper sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on top.
- The caption for a Wikipedian created image should read "Description at Article, by Creator". For a non-Wikipedian, it should be similar, but if the creator does not have an article, use an external link if appropriate. For images with substantial editing by one or more Wikipedians, but created by someone else, use "Description at Article, by Creator (edited by Editor)" (all editors involved should be clear from the nomination). Additionally, the description is optional - if it's essentially the same as the article title, then just use "Article, by Creator". Numerous examples can be found on the various Featured Pictures subpages.
- Add the image to the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures - newest on left and remove the oldest from the right so that there are always three in each section.
- Add the Featured Picture tag and star to the image page using {{Featured picture|page_name}} (replace page_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the page_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/page_name). To add this template you most likely will have to click the "create" button on the upper right if the "edit" button is not present, generally if the image originates from Commons.
- If an edited or alternative version of the originally nominated image is promoted, make sure that all articles contain the Featured Picture version, as opposed to the original.
- Notify the nominator or co-nominators by placing {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:file_name.xxx}} on each nominator's talk page. For example: {{subst:PromotedFPC|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
- If the image was created by a Wikipedian, place {{subst:UploadedFP|File:file_name.xxx}} on the creator's talk page. For example: {{subst:UploadedFP|File:Blue morpho butterfly.jpg}}.
- Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} to the top of the section.
- Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the May archive. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Page name}} from this page to the bottom of the archive.
- If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.
Delist closing procedure
Note that delisting an image does not equal deleting it. Delisting from Featured pictures in no way affects the image's status in its article/s.
If consensus is to KEEP featured picture status, and the image is used in at least one article, perform the following:
- Check that the image has been in the article for at least one week. Otherwise, suspend the nomination to give it time to stabilize before continuing.
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
- {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
-
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
-
- {{FPCresult|Kept|}} --~~~~
- Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
- Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Retained section of the archive.
- Optionally leave a note on the picture's talk page.
If consensus is to DELIST, or the image is unused (and consensus is not for a replacement that is used), perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
- {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
-
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
-
- {{FPCresult|Delisted|}} --~~~~
- Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
- Remove the image from the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs.
- Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
- Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} page to the bottom of the Delisted section of the archive.
If consensus is to REPLACE (and at least one of the images is used in articles), perform the following:
- Place the following text at the bottom of the WP:FPC/delist/subpage:
- {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
-
- Do NOT put any other information inside the FPCresult template. It should be copied and pasted exactly.
- Replace NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG with the name of the replacement file.
-
- {{FPCresult|Replaced|}} with File:NEW_IMAGE_FILENAME.JPG --~~~~
- Replace the {{Featured picture}} tag from the delisted image with {{FormerFeaturedPicture|delist/''Image name''}}.
- Update the replacement picture's tag, adding the tag {{Featured picture|delist/image_name}} (replace image_name with the nomination page name, i.e., the image_name from Wikipedia:Featured_picture_candidates/delist/image_name). Remove any no longer applicable tags from the original, replacement and from any other alternatives. If the alternatives were on Commons and no longer have any tags, be sure to tag the description page with {{missing image}}.
- Replace the delisted Featured Picture in all articles with the new replacement Featured Picture version. Do NOT replace the original in non-article space, such as Talk Pages, FPC nominations, archives, etc.
- Ensure that the replacement image is included on the appropriate sub-page of Wikipedia:Featured pictures and the appropriate section of Wikipedia:Featured pictures thumbs. Do this by replacing the original image with the new replacement image; do not add the replacement as a new Featured Picture.
- Move the nomination entry to the top of the "Recently closed nominations" section. It will remain there for three days after closing so others can review the nomination. This is done by simply moving the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the top of the section.
- Add the nomination entry to the bottom of the archived delist nominations. This is done by simply adding the line {{Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/delist/Image name}} to the bottom of the Replaced section of the archive.
Recently closed nominations
Nominations in this category have already been closed and are here for the purposes of closure review by FPC contributors. Please do not add any further comments or votes regarding the original nomination. If you wish to discuss any of these closures, please do so at Wikipedia talk:Featured picture candidates. Nominations will stay here for three full days following closure and subsequently be removed.
George Washington Carver
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 6 May 2016 at 00:05:41 (UTC)
- Reason
- Somewhat redone since last time to maximise contrast without misleading. All parts of his face are clear, and if I squint, the face is still distinct from the background. All photographs of Carver have some issues in black and white - he was a dark-skinned man who wore dark suits with light shirts - but that shouldn't mean no image of him is featureable
- Articles in which this image appears
- George Washington Carver
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Science and engineering
- Creator
- uncredited photo; restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Oppose - still too dark, could easily be fixed with photoshop "levels", then I'd support. --Janke | Talk 06:24, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Racelifting is not happening. If we make him look light-skinned, we are not only denying reality, we are being racist, saying that he' is too dark. Any group picture including him clearly shows he is very, very dark skinned. I realise that's not your intent, but we can't say that someone's too dark-skinned to have a representative FP, or that we should lighten their skin in order to make it look better, without extreme systematic bias. Adam Cuerden (talk) 11:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Weak oppose – Per Janke. Nothing to do with race, racism or skin color – it's about lighting. (Don't see significant difference between this version and the one nominated Feb. 8.) It's a shame – it would be good to have a pic of him in his prime rather than his dotage (hence, my "weak" vote). Sca (talk) 14:35, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Sca: The one in his dotage has exactly the same issues and was delisted because the older ones were obviously better. Adam Cuerden (talk) 19:48, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Eh historically photographers not used to photographing black people didn't always do a very good job of lighting them. Colour film actual managed to make things worse since it tended to be optimised for white and asian skin. ©Geni (talk) 17:45, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- Not sure I agree that the face is not clear here. It does seem very dark, like a poorly lit room. I am not sure what I could suggest to improve it, and I would not obligate anyone with a burden to fix this, but this is a difficult picture to see. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:33, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- @Janke, Sca, and Bluerasberry: Here is a photo of Carver with others from the Tuskegee Institute. He really looked like that. Adam Cuerden (talk) 21:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- Comment - is there a way to increase the contrast with the background by altering the background in some way without changing the levels of the subject?--Godot13 (talk) 05:57, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- Is this a suggested alt. nomination? I do think it's more accessible to the reader. Although the shirt is a bit blown, that's true of the orig., too. Sca (talk) 14:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- Well, yes, in a way - if people agree, the original could perchance be overwritten with this? At least I support this alt, if nobody wants to lighten it even further... --Janke | Talk 15:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- The alt makes me uncomfortable. It's almost cetrtainly too light in the skin, even if it looks better. Systemic bias is a major problem - we don't have a lot of black-and-white photographs of very dark skinned people, and correcting to what we think they should look like is dangerous. I'm going by other photos and group shots; I think that's a better guide than "I think it looks better." Also, do not overwrte this is a featured picture on Commons. Oppose alt on encyclopædic grounds. Adam Cuerden (talk) 16:38, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- Well, yes, in a way - if people agree, the original could perchance be overwritten with this? At least I support this alt, if nobody wants to lighten it even further... --Janke | Talk 15:58, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- Is this a suggested alt. nomination? I do think it's more accessible to the reader. Although the shirt is a bit blown, that's true of the orig., too. Sca (talk) 14:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- Weak Oppose: if the nominator is uncomfortable changing the original picture to make it lighter, then I oppose because the original is simply too dark. When I had my tablet screen at an almost flat angle so I could draw on it, I simply could not see it. I'm sure people in poor lighting conditions, with dim screens, or in the sun will see even less. Pinguinn (🐧) 16:44, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
“ | Is my monitor adjusted correctly?
|
” |
That's part of the featured picture criteria. @Pinguinn, Geni, and Janke: Your monitors are nto in line with the voting criteria, methinks. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:00, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- I can see all of them quite easily with the Surface 3, the same computer that I had mentioned earlier. Even at the angle I was using it at and couldn't see the image, I could see all 4 circles. Additionally, I'll point out, as I said before, some people may truly not have their monitors calibrated, or have poor ones, or be on a phone in the sun, etc. and see it even less well as I did. We deprive these people of knowledge by excluding them. Pinguinn (🐧) 22:06, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- My monitor is fine. "Brightness" isn't he issue here. So what is the problem? To me it looks like the photographer has used a rather shallow depth of field while focusing on the tip of Mr Carver's nose. Look how out of focus his ears and shoulder are. The result is the lack of firm boarder between his head and the background. The limited contrast between his head and the background results in a problem for some people.©Geni (talk) 23:10, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- We all should bear in mind that this photo was taken more than a century ago. But Adam, I don't see how lightening the photo to make the subject's visage discernible distorts either his race or the historical record. He remains clearly a black or Afro-American person. Sca (talk) 23:54, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- The "original" (a JPG) claims to be a "Picasa 300dpi scan vintage 2007", is that a sound base for any kind of restoration? For laptop users, check the angle of your display, I saw nothing on the display test image, with another angle all four circles were perfectly clear (manually calibrated VAIO 2011). The lower image is too bright for me. –Be..anyone 💩 08:11, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- OK, then: If you see all four circles clearly, your display is definitely too bright, and so will the photo be. The ideal is to "discern" three circles (but they are all almost black, anyhow!), and the fourth just barely, if at all. If the three rightmost circles are not "almost black", your display is too bright. You can also check your mid-tone calibration here: [2] - if that is off, all bets are lost... ;-) --Janke | Talk 11:04, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- I was holding off on voting on this one because I appreciate Adam Cuerden's restorations, but I came across this picture (to the right), which shows that it is really more a matter of poor lighting than skin colour. I believe his features are seen much more clearly in this photo (taken in daylight) than the nominated one. I will regretfully oppose on the grounds of poor lighting. Mattximus (talk) 14:45, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 00:29, 6 May 2016 (UTC)
Adolphe-Joseph-Louis Alizard from Le Charivari
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 5 May 2016 at 23:20:00 (UTC)
- Reason
- A nice caricature, shows a bit about how the opera was perceived (albeit through a lens of extreme satire), and shows the notability of the performer - one who does not appear to have many other images of him available, so the caricature is a bit more vluable than it otherwise might be.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Adolphe-Joseph-Louis Alizard, Jérusalem
- FP category for this image
- Let's go with Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Culture, entertainment, and lifestyle/Theatre
- Creator
- Anonymous (possibly Benjamin Roubaud?); restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 23:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support – Jobas (talk) 09:24, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Spongie555 (talk) 13:13, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support, piling on. Brandmeistertalk 14:40, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support - If only because he reminds me of a local politician or a certain plaid-clad handyman. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:49, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- The closest thing I found is this. Not enough. Bammesk (talk) 03:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- There was a more prominent politician who borrowed this gesture, commemorated in monuments. Brandmeistertalk 10:09, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- The closest thing I found is this. Not enough. Bammesk (talk) 03:53, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Would like to see the article expanded though. Étienne Dolet (talk) 20:11, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Promoted File:Adolphe-Joseph-Louis Alizard from Le Charivari.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:24, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Liberian 25-cent discovery note (1880)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 7 May 2016 at 04:42:49 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality, high EV, unreported denomination. The Liberian dollar has been the official currency of Liberia from 1847 to 1907 and from 1943 to the present.
- Articles in which these images appear
- Liberian dollar, Coat of arms of Liberia
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Currency/Other
- Creator
- Republic of Liberia
From the National Numismatic Collection, National Museum of American History
- Support as nominator – Godot13 (talk) 04:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- Problem This is an unusual case of an image breaching our No original research guidelines. Is anything due to appear in one of the numismatics publications?©Geni (talk) 17:42, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- ©Geni - I'm not sure how this is OR if I'm citing the main reference book on world banknotes as the source of information indicating that the denomination has not been reported to exist? I could change the description so that this image is simply a high-grade example of the Liberian dollar, but that would neglect it's importance...
- The problem is that it introduces unpublished idea. Specifically that the thing exists.©Geni (talk) 18:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- ©Geni- That the thing exists seems beyond question, given the image provided (from a reliable source, the NNC). Not wanting to split hairs, I have amended the description of the image so that its relevant EV for FPC is not based on denomination but rather on being a fairly high quality and very high resolution example of the series.--Godot13 (talk) 03:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- Love the image, but I do agree that we need a secondary source reporting this discovery. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 23:46, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- Chris- Can it be used as an illustration of the Liberian dollar and not as a discovery note (for the time being)?--Godot13 (talk) 23:58, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- I don't see why not, but this gets its EV from being a discovery note. I don't doubt that's accurate, but to comply with WP:RS I agree that we need a source recognizing its existence. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 00:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
-
-
- It'd be a primary source. I'd probably accept that for FPC, though if you were to go for FA or FL there'd have to be a secondary source. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Generally yes. There have been past cases where people have had to prod museums to publish blogs mentioning things about their collection.©Geni (talk) 19:58, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
-
- ©Geni- That the thing exists seems beyond question, given the image provided (from a reliable source, the NNC). Not wanting to split hairs, I have amended the description of the image so that its relevant EV for FPC is not based on denomination but rather on being a fairly high quality and very high resolution example of the series.--Godot13 (talk) 03:05, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- The problem is that it introduces unpublished idea. Specifically that the thing exists.©Geni (talk) 18:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
- ©Geni - I'm not sure how this is OR if I'm citing the main reference book on world banknotes as the source of information indicating that the denomination has not been reported to exist? I could change the description so that this image is simply a high-grade example of the Liberian dollar, but that would neglect it's importance...
- It also gets its EV from being a high grade example and having a vintage depiction of the coat of arms on the relevant article...--Godot13 (talk) 00:10, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Great scan and high ev. Spongie555 (talk) 13:15, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
- I think the best course of action here is for me to request a suspension pending my ability to secure either a primary or secondary source to support the discovery note aspect of this FPC.--Godot13 (talk) 02:50, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Conditional Support pending verification as noted above. Bammesk (talk) 04:01, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Suspended per the nominators request. Armbrust The Homunculus 20:32, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
- Why use jpg rather than lossless formats like PNG for your scans, by the way? Cf. commons:Help:Scanning. ImageMagick says "Quality: 96" (from "Photoshop Quality : 11" per exiftool), 99 would in theory be better if you can't go lossless. Nemo 16:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
- Because 1) PNG renders terribly in-wiki, and these images are meant to be used in articles, and 2) there is little, if any, appreciable difference between PS quality 11 and PS quality 12 if you are only saving one time. Godot probably doesn't have the same issue, but when I'm uploading on my very slow Indonesian connection, the extra 10–20 mb PS quality 12 would add is just too much to be offset by the minimal difference. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:18, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
- Withdraw - It will take some time to create the appropriate source for the discovery of this note. I will re-nominate when the time comes. --Godot13 (talk) 05:04, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 13:09, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
- Withdrawn nomination. Armbrust The Homunculus 13:09, 5 May 2016 (UTC)
Teresa Carreño
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 4 May 2016 at 00:06:32 (UTC)
- Reason
- A nice photo of a notable pianist, composer, singer, and conductor. May be CSS-cropped, if desired.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Teresa Carreño
- FP category for this image
- WP:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
- Creator
- Uncredited photographer; restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk) 00:06, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:10, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support, good composition. Brandmeistertalk 07:07, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support – SSTflyer 07:14, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support - Jobas (talk) 22:30, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
- Support Good picture great pose relevant subject matter. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:35, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
- comment That busy background that sets behind the right hand side of her face is less than ideal.©Geni (talk) 17:46, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Promoted File:Teresa Carreño at the piano.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 00:08, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Suspended nominations
This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.