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?
|
Contents
- 1 Current nominations
- 1.1 Julia Margaret Cameron
- 1.2 Nelly Diener
- 1.3 Crested Shrike-tit
- 1.4 Orange-headed Thrush
- 1.5 Lucy Arbell
- 1.6 Delist: Probably-not Caligo eurilochus
- 1.7 Delist: Unidentified Papilio larva and Crepidinae sp. flower
- 1.8 Umberto Eco
- 1.9 Magpie moth
- 1.10 Small pearl-bordered fritillary
- 1.11 Bank myna
- 1.12 Jacinda Ardern after the Christchurch mosque shootings
- 1.13 Viaduc de Garabit
- 1.14 Brest, 1700
- 1.15 Assassin bug with prey
- 1.16 Common blue butterflies mating
- 1.17 Roesel's bush-cricket ssp. diluta
- 1.18 Stellar nursery seen by the Spitzer Space Telescope
- 1.19 Carmen
- 2 Nominations — to be closed
- 3 Older nominations requiring additional input from users
- 4 Closing procedure
- 5 Delist closing procedure
- 6 Recently closed nominations
- 6.1 Dallol
- 6.2 San Francisco Earthquake of 1906, Ruins in vicinity of Post and Grant Avenue
- 6.3 Louis Désiré Blanquart-Evrard
- 6.4 Marie-Aimée Roger-Miclos
- 6.5 Paulette del Baye
- 6.6 Henry David Thoreau
- 6.7 Edgar Allan Poe
- 6.8 Rudra Mahalaya Temple
- 6.9 Delist: Matterhorn
- 6.10 CG Heart
- 6.11 Plumed Whistling Duck
- 6.12 Pacific Reef Heron
- 6.13 Spotted Wood Owl
- 6.14 Lucy Arbell in Massenet's Thérèse
- 7 Suspended nominations
- To see recent changes, .
FPCs needing feedback | ||||
---|---|---|---|---|
![]() |
Assassin bug with prey |
Current nominations
Julia Margaret Cameron
Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2019 at 22:57:36 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/62/Julia_Margaret_Cameron_MET_DP114480_-_Restoration.jpg/260px-Julia_Margaret_Cameron_MET_DP114480_-_Restoration.jpg)
- Reason
- Pretty good for the time, and, while not perfect, certainly pretty decent. Wouldn't object to pushing this more towards greyscale, but I'd rather not have it go all the way there.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Julia Margaret Cameron
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Henry Herschel Hay Cameron, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 22:57, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support per nom, looks good to me, good EV. Mattximus (talk) 23:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Nelly Diener
Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2019 at 18:02:07 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/Nelly_Diener_cropped.jpg/260px-Nelly_Diener_cropped.jpg)
- Reason
- Historic EV and composition (coincidentally, in front of the aircraft in which she would crash).
- Articles in which this image appears
- Nelly Diener
- FP category for this image
- People/Others
- Creator
- Swissair, restored by PawełMM and Brandmeister
- Support as nominator – Brandmeistertalk 18:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 20:59, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 23:08, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Crested Shrike-tit
Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2019 at 00:18:52 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality. High EV
- Articles in which this image appears
- Crested shriketit
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- JJ Harrison
- Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 00:u18, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Focus not quite as good as the other, but still very good. Is that a typo in the filename? The "." before "Dharug"? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 00:34, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah. I've never been successful in getting a right to move files on Commons to fix this kind of thing myself though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ JJ Harrison (talk) 00:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Fixed it, then. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:58, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yeah. I've never been successful in getting a right to move files on Commons to fix this kind of thing myself though. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ JJ Harrison (talk) 00:49, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support @Yann: Who can get filemovers rights for JJH? Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:41, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- I think I got mine by just asking, but that was like 10 years ago. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 18:57, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- @JJ Harrison: Sure. Did you ask? Yann (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 21:00, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support another excellent photograph. Mattximus (talk) 23:33, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Orange-headed Thrush
Voting period ends on 15 Apr 2019 at 00:12:48 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality. Stable in article for years demonstrates EV.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Orange-headed thrush
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- JJ Harrison
- Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 00:12, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Superbly detailed. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 00:32, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Great focus and contrast, the hint of green in the back right is an added plus DannyS712 (talk) 07:56, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support I like square crop for these little birds in top right box Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:39, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 21:02, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Excellent EV. Mattximus (talk) 23:34, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Lucy Arbell
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2019 at 05:48:53 (UTC)
- Reason
- While she does feature heavily in the Thérèse poster we had recently, that's more for the opera. This photo covers her appearance.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Lucy Arbell
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
- Creator
- Paul Nadar, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 05:48, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 09:53, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Comment white marks beside her right ear? Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:02, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- I thought that might be a feather, but in light of morning, it's not. A moment. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 14:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Charlesjsharp: Fixed. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 15:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- I thought that might be a feather, but in light of morning, it's not. A moment. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 14:47, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 18:35, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:38, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Great EV, nice restoration. Mattximus (talk) 23:34, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Delist: Probably-not Caligo eurilochus
Voting period ends on 14 Apr 2019 at 00:57:34 (UTC)
- Reason
- Similar to the below (and I wish I had included it there), but with a very confusing edit history - it looks like a copy-move - this is another image where it was thought to be one thing, this is disputed, crap, oh well, not really useable now. Again, an excellent image let down by documentation.
- Articles this image appears in
- N/A
- Previous nomination/s
- Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Caligo eurilochus 3 Richard Bartz.jpg
- Nominator
- Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs
- Delist — Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 00:57, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist Charlesjsharp (talk) 13:03, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist. MER-C 17:41, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist procedural since it's not in any page. Mattximus (talk) 23:35, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Delist: Unidentified Papilio larva and Crepidinae sp. flower
Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2019 at 15:37:03 (UTC)
- Reason
- Per commons:File talk:Unidentified Papilio larva Stratford Butterfly Farm (1).jpg there are substantial doubts as to the identity of this caterpillar, hence why it is no longer used in any articles. The Crepidinae sp. was originally identified as Taraxacum officinale, this has also been disputed. Both are beautifully shot, but the lack of accepted identification screws them over.
- Articles this image appears in
- N/A
- Previous nomination/s
- Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Papilio demodocus larva Stratford Butterfly Farm (1).jpg and Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Taraxacum officinale
- Nominator
- Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs
- Delist — Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 15:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist Charlesjsharp (talk) 20:01, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist. MER-C 20:32, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist. Josh Milburn (talk) 20:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist - Thanks for cleaning up the featured picture pantheon. Mattximus (talk) 00:18, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Delist - DannyS712 (talk) 07:57, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Umberto Eco
Voting period ends on 13 Apr 2019 at 09:07:17 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ef/Italiaanse_schrijver_Umberto_Eco_%2C_kop.jpg/260px-Italiaanse_schrijver_Umberto_Eco_%2C_kop.jpg)
- Reason
- Recent FP on Commons of this famous literary author.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Umberto Eco, List of atheist authors
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Rob Bogaerts
- Support as nominator – MER-C 09:07, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Nice portrait, high EV. --Yann (talk) 09:17, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:41, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support. I don't love the greyscale, but it's a very good portrait, and has very high EV. Not often we have a free photo from the '80s! Josh Milburn (talk) 20:53, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 21:08, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Magpie moth
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2019 at 12:02:40 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality large image. FP on Commons. Illustrates article well.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Abraxas grossulariata
- FP category for this image
- lWikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
- Creator
- Charlesjsharp
- Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose because of flash, causes strange effect in wing scales. --Janke | Talk 15:17, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Small pearl-bordered fritillary
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2019 at 11:58:44 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/db/Small_pearl-bordered_fritillary_%28Boloria_selene%29.jpg/300px-Small_pearl-bordered_fritillary_%28Boloria_selene%29.jpg)
- Reason
- High quality large image. FP on Commons. Illustrates article well.
- Articles in which this image appears
- small pearl-bordered fritillary, Wyre Forest,
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
- Creator
- Charlesjsharp
- Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:58, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Nice, high EV. --Yann (talk) 15:02, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Question Is this also a flash shot? There are some strange striations in the wings (looks like scales are missing in places), is that flash reflection, or possibly damage to the specimen? --Janke | Talk 15:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- EXIF says flash was used. MER-C 18:25, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- It does, but I remember the sunny day and cannot imagine why I would have used flash! The shadow is sun, not flash as I didn't use off-camera flash then. If the on-cmaera fash had fired, there would be two shadows. Some scales are missing, you can see a number of scratch marks across the wings. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:44, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Bank myna
Voting period ends on 12 Apr 2019 at 11:55:42 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality large image. FP on Commons. Illustrates article well.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Bank myna
- FP category for this image
- lWikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- Charlesjsharp
- Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support Nice, high EV. --Yann (talk) 15:03, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Janke | Talk 15:17, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 18:23, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support per nom. Mattximus (talk) 20:35, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support : DreamSparrow Chat 03:49, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Jacinda Ardern after the Christchurch mosque shootings
Voting period ends on 10 Apr 2019 at 16:28:48 (UTC)
- Reason
- Huge encyclopedic value. The extent of the photo's significance to the events has even been written about in e.g. The Guardian and The Sydney Morning Herald. Seems like a good example of EV outweighing some elements on the technical side that would typically prevent an image from being promoted. See also the Signpost.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Christchurch mosque shootings, Jacinda Ardern
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People
- Creator
- Kirk Hargreaves, uploaded by Giantflightlessbirds
- Support as nominator – — Rhododendrites talk \\ 16:28, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- Conditional support provided that the OTRS permission is verified. Photo has become notable in its own right. MER-C 17:40, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- I agree that we should wait until the OTRS is cleared. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose Very poor image of an important event. There are dozens of better ones around. Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. This is a case of the picture of itself being an item of interest - and this is partially because of the technical imperfections. The nominator's claim of high EV holds up. --LukeSurl t c 08:06, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
CommentOppose – This depicts an emotionally charged recent event, and the image captures that. However, I wonder how much the original image was manipulated for effect – the hands for instance. Color? Saturation? In other words, is this a picture of how things really were? – Sca (talk) 15:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
- PS: Keep in mind, Ms. Adern is a currently sitting politician. – Sca (talk) 15:13, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
- I certainly hear your concern, but I would argue (as others have) that the EV of the image outweighs those technical concerns. However, if you still have outstanding issues, what solution would you propose? Cwilson97 (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2019
- From the Guardian and Sydney Morning Herald stories above we have a pretty detailed account of how the image was taken. "The photo, which first appeared on a city council Twitter feed, appeared as taken with barely any touch-ups or editing." —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 20:11, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
- I certainly hear your concern, but I would argue (as others have) that the EV of the image outweighs those technical concerns. However, if you still have outstanding issues, what solution would you propose? Cwilson97 (talk) 16:14, 1 April 2019
- So you are opposing because of ... a feeling of wondering if something is manipulated? The hands in particular? What evidence do you have for this (and/or that the accounts in the publications are lying/misleading)? Are you saying the hands are copied in? Or just that the saturation was changed (as it has been for many or even most FPs, to some degree). Oppose because you think the technical specs are more important than the broad press coverage this has received reporting on the significance of the photo to the events, or because they're wrong, but not because of some hunch of bad faith on the part of the photographer or some allusion to [over-?]post-processing. There are plenty of valid reasons to oppose this one -- it's the quality is not typical of FPs, after all -- but this one I don't get. — Rhododendrites talk \\ 21:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- PS: Keep in mind, Ms. Adern is a currently sitting politician. – Sca (talk) 15:13, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose, the picture does not really describe either of the main topics, but is tangentially related to both, so I do not see strong EV for this artistic photograph. Mattximus (talk) 20:36, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Not sure how the photo of Jacinda Ardern in one of her most important public appearances is only tangentially related to Jacinda Ardern. And the feeling here in NZ is that photo is absolutely an important part of the mosque shootings aftermath. —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 20:42, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Through a window blurred with reflections? Mattximus (talk) 00:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Yes. What does the technical quality have to do with whether it's an important photo or not? Have you read the linked articles about the photo? —Giantflightlessbirds (talk) 01:25, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Through a window blurred with reflections? Mattximus (talk) 00:58, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support I don't get it, but the evidence convinces me this image is iconic of the event. I suspect, if it doesn't pass, coming back in a month with evidence of its enduring importance will make it pass. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:09, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support – there are sufficient sources on the photo itself that it would be notable even in the absence of the surrounding context, which I think suggests sufficient EV; it's great to have a notable news photo available to Wikipedia straight after the event. TSP (talk) 11:05, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support per nom --Tagishsimon (talk) 22:34, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
- What about the OTRS permission? Do you have the ticket number? Regards, Yann (talk) 21:04, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Viaduc de Garabit
Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2019 at 13:22:37 (UTC)
- Reason
- Highly detailed image, free of distortions, one can count the individual rivets
- Articles in which this image appears
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Garabit_viaduct
- FP category for this image
- Viaduc de Garabit
- Creator
- Geertchaos
- Support as nominator – Geertchaos (talk) 20:22, 21 March 2019 (UTC)
- Transcluding nomination. MER-C 13:22, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - noisy, slightly tilted, slightly overexposed and pano exposure differs between frames. There's also something not quite right with the vegetation on the LHS - it seems overprocessed. That said, if you can return to the original RAWs you should be able to correct at least some of these problems and the result might very well meet FP standards. MER-C 13:32, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Agree with the above. Too much sharpening has accentuated the noise, and caused some haloing, too. --Janke | Talk 14:52, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Brest, 1700
Voting period ends on 9 Apr 2019 at 12:07:35 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Carte_de_Brest_-_ca_1700_-_Biblioth%C3%A8que_Nationale_de_France_-_Btv1b8439976x.jpg/355px-Carte_de_Brest_-_ca_1700_-_Biblioth%C3%A8que_Nationale_de_France_-_Btv1b8439976x.jpg)
- Reason
- Nicely restored map. Recent FP on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Brest, France, Timeline of Brest, France
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Diagrams, drawings, and maps/Maps
- Creator
- Unknown, restored by S. DÉNIEL
- Support as nominator – MER-C 12:07, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:47, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Nice, high EV. --Yann (talk) 15:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 01:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support : DreamSparrow Chat 03:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Assassin bug with prey
Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2019 at 12:19:46 (UTC)
- Reason
- High quality large image illustrates articles well. FP on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Rhynocoris iracundus, Reduviidae, Harpactorinae, Rhynocoris
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
- Creator
- Charlesjsharp
- Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:19, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment - Main subject is only a small fraction of the image area. --Janke | Talk 13:51, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment – I am undecided, the nom image has very good EV, it shows an assassin bug with a prey. I would support the infobox image in article Rhynocoris iracundus, if it was cropped with a few more pixels to meet 1500px. It has more detail. Bammesk (talk) 01:08, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- alternative uploaded Janke and Bammesk Charlesjsharp (talk) 16:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support both, prefer Alt –
but Alt definitely needs a re-crop to meet 1500px, and perhaps denoising of the bokeh... done. Bammesk (talk) 13:35, 30 March 2019 (UTC) Conditional support either, prefer original. First image should be cropped, the second needs a slightly wider crop to meet the resolution criteria. MER-C 13:41, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Crop of original would probably invalidate FP on Commons. New larger, denoised version of alt. uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- How about uploading the former as a separate file? MER-C 17:45, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- Can we do that? Charlesjsharp (talk) 18:01, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- I don't see any reason why you can't upload the crop with a different filename. We edit FPCs all the time. The only catch is that the Commons FP might replace the en.wp FP in the article some time in the future. MER-C 18:37, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
- I'd withdraw this if I knew how to! Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support alt. MER-C 18:36, 4 April 2019 (UTC)
Common blue butterflies mating
Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2019 at 12:07:35 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5f/Common_blues_%28Polyommatus_icarus%29_mating%2C_male_%28l%29_and_female_%28r%29.jpg/300px-Common_blues_%28Polyommatus_icarus%29_mating%2C_male_%28l%29_and_female_%28r%29.jpg)
- Reason
- High quality large image illustrates artice well. FP on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Common blue
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
- Creator
- Charlesjsharp
- Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 12:07, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Janke | Talk 15:00, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 20:51, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 00:52, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - DannyS712 (talk) 21:49, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support -- DreamSparrow Chat 03:50, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 21:06, 5 April 2019 (UTC)
Roesel's bush-cricket ssp. diluta
Voting period ends on 7 Apr 2019 at 11:58:24 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/Roesel%27s_bush-cricket_%28Metrioptera_roeselii_diluta%29_male.jpg/300px-Roesel%27s_bush-cricket_%28Metrioptera_roeselii_diluta%29_male.jpg)
- Reason
- High quality large image. FP on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Roesel's bush-cricket, Orthoptera, Tettigoniidae, Portal:Orthoptera
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Insects
- Creator
- Charlesjsharp
- Support as nominator – Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:58, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment & weak oppose - That darn little leaf kills it for me, part of the subject is covered... --Janke | Talk 15:01, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Stellar nursery seen by the Spitzer Space Telescope
Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2019 at 23:03:28 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/31/The_Spitzer_Space_Telescope%27s_view_of_W40.jpg/399px-The_Spitzer_Space_Telescope%27s_view_of_W40.jpg)
- Reason
- Large-scale view of one of the nearest stellar nurseries. 1) The image meets a high technical standard because it was taken by a NASA telescope and produced by professionals at JPL, and therefore represents the best possible image of this nebula. 2) This is the full-size JPEG image and represents the highest resolution of the Spitzer Space Telescope. 3) The W40 region is astronomically important because it is one of the nearest sites of massive star formation in our galaxy, and the infrared image by Spitzer makes the nebula look spectacular. 4) It was released by NASA, so it is free. 5) I have used this image to illustrate the article Westerhout 40. 6) The information can be verified by the description in the JPL image release [1]. 7) The image's description on the Wikimedia Commons page is complete and correct.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Westerhout 40 +1
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Space/Looking out
- Creator
- NASA/JPL-Caltech
- Support as nominator – OtterAM (talk) 23:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Strikingly beautiful image. --Janke | Talk 08:29, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. Note: I re-exported the image from the TIFF at the source with a higher quality setting. MER-C 21:11, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment – leaning to support but there are a few streaks that can be photoshopped and removed, at x,y=(1965,1030), (1610,2330), (1675,2330), (1870,2330), (2625,1560). They are faintly visible at full size (100%) and easy to see at 200%. Bammesk (talk) 01:20, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- I believe the lines you noticed are an effect called "muxbleed" which affects data from infrared detectors at cryogenic temperatures. Although these can be partially corrected in the data [2], they remain faintly visible in the images. I don't own photoshop (or have experience using it), but if someone else wants to see if they can photoshop these out, they are welcome to try. OtterAM (talk) 03:19, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 13:31, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Nice, high EV. --Yann (talk) 15:11, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Carmen
Voting period ends on 6 Apr 2019 at 12:38:21 (UTC)
- Reason
- A poster from the première is always valuable; one that also shows such an important scene may be spoilery, but is also very high EV.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Carmen +1
- FP category for this image
- WP:FP/THEATRE
- Creator
- Prudent-Louis Leray, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 12:38, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 21:06, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 03:48, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Yann (talk) 15:20, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 01:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support -- DreamSparrow Chat 03:51, 3 April 2019 (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| }} --~~~~
- 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.
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}}.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
- 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 April 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|}} --~~~~
- 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.
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.
Then perform the following, regardless of the outcome:
- 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 appropriate section of the archive.
- If the nomination is listed at Template:FPC urgents, remove it.
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.
Dallol
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2019 at 20:24:16 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/ET_Afar_asv2018-01_img48_Dallol.jpg/463px-ET_Afar_asv2018-01_img48_Dallol.jpg)
- Reason
- Nice photo of this interesting, difficult to reach and underappreciated (as far as Wikipedia is concerned) place. Fairly recent unanimous FP on Commons.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Dallol (volcano)
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Landscapes
- Creator
- A.Savin
- Support as nominator – MER-C 20:24, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment - Could use a bit of photoshopping; slight gamma correction to brighten it a bit (note: not exposure correction, that might blow the highlights in the cone), plus removal of the dark vignetting in the corners/edges. --Janke | Talk 20:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – EV, and agree with suggestions above. I yield to photographer's edits. Bammesk (talk) 01:43, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Thanks for nominating. --A.Savin (talk) 23:26, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 06:25, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Yann (talk) 16:58, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:31, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support -- DreamSparrow Chat 03:51, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:ET Afar asv2018-01 img48 Dallol.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:27, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
San Francisco Earthquake of 1906, Ruins in vicinity of Post and Grant Avenue
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2019 at 18:30:09 (UTC)
- Reason
- historical image of great encyclopedic value
- Articles in which this image appears
- 1906 San Francisco earthquake, Portal:Disasters, Disaster, Ruins, Lloyd's of London, San Francisco graft trials, and several others
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/History/USA History
- Creator
- H. D. Chadwick, restored by Yann
- Support as nominator The quality is not extraordinary, but this is largely compensated by the historical value. – Yann (talk) 18:30, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- There's a couple of areas that could do with a little more cleanup - a streak on the RHS at about y=700 and that stuff in the top left appears to be a smudge and not smoke. By the way, may I interest you in File:San Francisco Fire Sacramento Street 1906-04-18.jpg? MER-C 20:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment Not entirely happy with the sky. It looks kind of overblown, in a very dirty way. Though it doesnt' look as bad from some angles on my LCD screen Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 23:32, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Adam Cuerden: What do you suggest? As I said above, the quality is a bit below other candidates, but I think this is compensated by the historical value. Regards, Yann (talk) 23:37, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Dodge/burn tool? Might also want to crop some sky: The buidings aren't bad at all. I think cropping a little above the two smoke plumes would get rid of a lot of ugly damaged sky with a net improvement to composition. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 23:56, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- I am fine with a crop. Should I overload the image? What do others think? Regards, Yann (talk) 11:17, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Up to you. Feel free to remove my mockup when it's no longer helpful. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 11:47, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Almost perfect now. I've added a couple image notes on a last couple things, but I'm sure you'll get them. Support Seriously, skies are the worst. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 13:32, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Done Yann (talk) 13:47, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- I've noted one more thing I noted while reviewing. I'm sorry for all the trouble. I think my monitor has fairly good detail in the upper range. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 14:54, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Good historical EV. Sca (talk) 15:41, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 20:50, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – we have other FPs in the article, but the nom image is a good depiction of the damage. Bammesk (talk) 03:53, 29 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - DannyS712 (talk) 06:14, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:52, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Post-and-Grant-Avenue-Look.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 18:35, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Louis Désiré Blanquart-Evrard
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2019 at 11:15:13 (UTC)
- Reason
- high resolution and quality portrait of one of the inventor of photography
- Articles in which this image appears
- Louis Désiré Blanquart-Evrard, Albumen print, École des arts industriels et des mines
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Self-portrait. Uploaded, stitched and restored by Jebulon
- Support as nominator French chemist, printer and photographer, inventor of the albumen print process. – Yann (talk) 11:15, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Knee looks a little odd at first, but the bright bits follow the texture of the fabric, and are almost certainly original. Everything else I'd pass without pause. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 11:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Excellent EV. Mattximus (talk) 19:14, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 20:26, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for nom. please notice that 24 March is my birthday date ! (58, oh my Gosh !)--Jebulon (talk) 16:02, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 01:27, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Louis Désiré Blanquart-Evrard 1869 photograph BNF Gallica.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:19, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Marie-Aimée Roger-Miclos
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2019 at 11:13:39 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/Marie-Aim%C3%A9e_Roger-Miclos_-_Photograph_A_from_the_Album_Reutlinger_de_portraits_divers%2C_vol._21.jpg/260px-Marie-Aim%C3%A9e_Roger-Miclos_-_Photograph_A_from_the_Album_Reutlinger_de_portraits_divers%2C_vol._21.jpg)
- Reason
- It's a fine photograph of a notable woman.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Marie-Aimée Roger-Miclos
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
- Creator
- Jean Reutlinger, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 11:13, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support –Yann (talk) 11:19, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Hmmm, would prefer this to be face on. MER-C 17:47, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- @MER-C: I'm not sure you would. We have examples of it by the same photographer, but I don't think they look as good. File:Btv1b85969082-p022_-_Roger-Miclos_C.jpg It's kind of German-Expressionisst-film-looking. Perhaps image Ç (not C: Ç) would be okay. But this is my favourite. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 17:51, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Brandmeistertalk 22:01, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – but prefer more of the original tone. Also I prefer this: File:Btv1b85969082-p022_-_Roger-Miclos_C.jpg and I think it belongs in her article, it shows all of her face. Bammesk (talk) 01:59, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Bammesk: Er, I'm pretty sure I didn't change the tones. At all. It does look like the source file on Commons may not have been the true original, though. I've fixed that. I'll have a poke at C as well, but I'm not sure about that light patch at the top. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 05:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thanks for the fix and the restoration. I would support a delist and replace if C is nominated, but I don't think the article supports two FPs. Bammesk (talk) 00:26, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Adam, about the light patch at the top, it has no material significance, I think it's Ok to modify it, and also Ok to leave it be. Bammesk (talk) 15:37, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Could you mark it on the image notes at commons? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 16:43, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- About the "light patch at the top", I was referring to what you said in this edit, in other words the bright background at the very top of this image (approximately the top 200 pixels). Bammesk (talk) 17:02, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Supportive comment as article creator: I'd mention that the side view gives a good look at Roger-Miclos' hairstyle and the interesting shoulder detail of her gown. She was a model for at least one art medal (as mentioned in the article), so the profile was a characteristic pose for her. - Penny Richards (talk) 23:18, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- @Penny Richards: are you placing a "Support" vote? If yes, please be specific and change your wording above to "Support" rather than "Supportive". Bammesk (talk) 00:53, 3 April 2019 (UTC) . . . Sidenote: FYI, everyone can vote on featured picture nominations, image creators, article creator, etc. Also, per instructions at the top of this page, nominations need a minimum of 5 votes, so your vote, or lack of, can change the outcome of this nomination.
- (In the interests of openness, I did mention to Penny this existed, since she did make the article, when discussing the below FPC for Paulette del Baye, another article she made.) Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 01:37, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 01:38, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Marie-Aimée Roger-Miclos - Photograph A from the Album Reutlinger de portraits divers, vol. 21.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 11:14, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Paulette del Baye
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 3 Apr 2019 at 09:17:13 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/7/72/Paulette_del_Baye_-_Photograph_in_Les_Modes_75_%281907-03%29.jpg/260px-Paulette_del_Baye_-_Photograph_in_Les_Modes_75_%281907-03%29.jpg)
- Reason
- Quite a nice example of fin de siecle fashion photography. Grainy - it's either a lithograph or a very, very high quality half-tone - but the original photo wouldn't have been in colour, so that's the compromise.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Paulette del Baye; gallery at Paul Boyer (photographer)
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Entertainment
- Creator
- Paul Boyer restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 09:17, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support –Yann (talk) 10:19, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - is it just me, or is there a bit of moire in the original scan? MER-C 20:38, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- I didn't notice any, but lithograph/high-quality halftone is kinda weird in its nature anyway. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 21:39, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:18, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - DannyS712 (talk) 06:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Paulette del Baye - Photograph in Les Modes 75 (1907-03).jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:36, 3 April 2019 (UTC)
Henry David Thoreau
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 22:34:52 (UTC)
- Reason
- completely restored high resolution image of a famous writer
- Articles in which this image appears
- Henry David Thoreau, Civil disobedience, Pacifism, Civil Disobedience (Thoreau), History of anarchism, Individualist anarchism, Anarcho-pacifism, The Night Thoreau Spent in Jail, Slavery in Massachusetts, and many others
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- B. D. Maxham, restored and uploaded by Yann
- Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 22:34, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 07:08, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support It's a slightly odd image, but I can't really den the quality. Would prefer a little more of the original yellow in the balance, but it doesn't actively hurt the image like it does for certain other ones (where the colours are used for effect or help contrast). Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 12:34, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
Support – Bammesk (talk) 02:26, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Nice image, great author DannyS712 (talk) 04:23, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose per the discussion on Commons. Definitely has FP potential, though. MER-C 13:12, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Bammesk and MER-C: What do you think about this version? Regards, Yann (talk) 21:19, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 23:55, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Edgar Allan Poe
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 20:56:42 (UTC)
![](https://web.archive.org/web/20190405235101im_/https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/97/Edgar_Allan_Poe%2C_circa_1849%2C_restored%2C_squared_off.jpg/260px-Edgar_Allan_Poe%2C_circa_1849%2C_restored%2C_squared_off.jpg)
- Reason
- One of very few photos of Poe, lovingly restored.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Edgar Allan Poe
- FP category for this image
- WP:Featured pictures/People/Artists and writers
- Creator
- Unknown; restored by Yann and Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 20:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Yann (talk) 22:15, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment I like the alt, but I don't like that my and Yann's release into the public domain has gained a CC-license, especially when it didn't originally credit Yann and I. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Adam Cuerden (talk • contribs) 10:11, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Original or Alt 1 --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 07:07, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Strong Oppose What was originally a Daguerrotype (an image formed on a silvered metal plate), has now been restored to something looking more like an albumen print, thus misrepresenting the original. --Janke | Talk 08:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- As I understand it, daguerreotypes did not look like that originally - e.g. as faded and damaged, they just experience rather nasty degradation over time. In any case, it hasnt changed that substantially, other than crop, some contrast, and expansion outwards to remove the severely damaged tarnished area surrounding it. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 11:15, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Janke: Do you think that File:Edgar Allan Poe, circa 1849, restored.jpg would be better? Adam's version has more restoration, but this may look like closer to a daguerreotype. Regards, Yann (talk) 11:59, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Daguerrotypes were typically mounted in a glass frame, sometimes with a cover, as a little book. The restorations have removed this. The above mentioned oval restoration (with faded edges) re-inserted in the original frame would satisfy me, looking like a real Daguerrotype. --Janke | Talk 13:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- PD-Art only applies to two-dimensional works, the frames are 3D. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 13:51, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- We have the picture with the frame under a free license, but without restoration. It comes from the Getty Museum via Google Art Project. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:55, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Hm. It's a point. I have a suspicion this one will be preferred in articles, though, where the focus is Poe, not historic photography. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 14:12, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- We have the picture with the frame under a free license, but without restoration. It comes from the Getty Museum via Google Art Project. Regards, Yann (talk) 13:55, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- PD-Art only applies to two-dimensional works, the frames are 3D. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 13:51, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Daguerrotypes were typically mounted in a glass frame, sometimes with a cover, as a little book. The restorations have removed this. The above mentioned oval restoration (with faded edges) re-inserted in the original frame would satisfy me, looking like a real Daguerrotype. --Janke | Talk 13:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment – @Qono: when you introduce an alternate please say you did so in a comment, so the reviewers know the nominator isn't presenting two versions. Also, I think it is inappropriate to take a restoration, add more restoration to it (in this case, not in a significant time consuming way, in my opinion) and present it as an alternate while the original restorer(s) are active editors and could have done so (if they chose to) with a mere suggestion. Same for a photograph or a drawing if the creator is an active editor. Just my two cents. Bammesk (talk) 16:20, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Got it, I'll be sure to note introductions of alternatives in the future. I'm not sure why it's inappropriate to contribute an alternative. I'm used to the Wikipedia standard of "be bold", but if there are more local norms I'm violating here, please let me know. Thanks. Qono (talk) 16:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Well... you did fail to credit Yann or me, and changed the license from our release into the public domain to one requiring reusers credit you (but not us, since we weren't listed)... that's problematic. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 17:07, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- In article space, contributors get no credit (or exposure) when their work is used elsewhere (inside or outside wikipedia), so being bold and taking liberty is a nonissue. For visual content (including restorations) contributors get credited when their images are used (for example on the main page), see the archives and notice the footnotes; therefore contributing to others' work and having one's name or username be listed alongside their name would be inappropriate IMO when/if such contributions are non-significant (in creativity or timewise) and when the original contributors are active editors and could do so (if they chose) with a mere suggestion. Bammesk (talk) 17:29, 24 March 2019 (UTC) . . . . fixed the archive link.
- Well, also note that [3] - the version of the file description Qono used - and this is probably a mistake, but a rather bad one - credits Qono as sole author and mentions neither Yann nor me anywhere on the page. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 18:19, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Would it have been better to upload a new version at the original location? Qono (talk) 19:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- I've proposed additional language to the main featured pictures candidates page to help clarify the process for newcomers who want to edit candidates. I propose we continue this discussion there, for those who are interested. Feel free to remove my alternate here, if you would like, Adam_Cuerden. Sorry for the trouble. Qono (talk) 02:29, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Got it, I'll be sure to note introductions of alternatives in the future. I'm not sure why it's inappropriate to contribute an alternative. I'm used to the Wikipedia standard of "be bold", but if there are more local norms I'm violating here, please let me know. Thanks. Qono (talk) 16:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – EV, I think it fits the article without the frame as well as with the frame. Bammesk (talk) 02:33, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
Not Promoted --Armbrust The Homunculus 21:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- None of the images has enough support for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 21:06, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Rudra Mahalaya Temple
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 15:06:22 (UTC)
- Reason
- high resolution image and good quality
- Articles in which this image appears
- Rudra Mahalaya Temple, List of Monuments of National Importance in Gujarat, Ahmad Shah I, Chaulukya dynasty, Jayasimha Siddharaja, Siddhpur
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture
- Creator
- Bourne & Shepherd, retouched and uploaded by Yann
- Support as nominator – Yann (talk) 15:06, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Can you fix the very obvious blown pixels in the upper left sky? Checking the other copies of the image, the other flaws seem communal, but that's unique to this. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 11:33, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Adam Cuerden: Done. Yann (talk) 12:21, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you! Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 12:32, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Please forgive my ignorance, but what does this image show that a modern photo doesn't? MER-C 12:29, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- We don't have a recent picture of equivalent quality. As the article was promoted as GA with the same picture of much worse quality, it should be OK. Regards, Yann (talk) 12:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 17:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Good quality for a photo from this era, and solid EV. Nick-D (talk) 01:26, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support High-quality historical photo with good composition. OtterAM (talk) 21:32, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Ruins of the Rudra Mala at Siddhpur, Gujarat, retouched.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 19:10, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Delist: Matterhorn
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 09:39:26 (UTC)
- Reason
- Unused, possibly oversaturated, not up to modern standards re: landscapes - in particular noticeable posterisation/JPEG artifacts in the sky.
- Articles this image appears in
- Zippo
- Previous nomination/s
- Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Image:Matterhorn Riffelsee 2005-06-11 crop.jpg
- Nominator
- MER-C
- Delist — MER-C 09:39, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Delist --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 17:58, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Keep I honestly believe that this is a high-quality image and has no major issues preventing it from staying at the featured status. Goveganplease (talk) 05:36, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- One of the guidelines states that
"If the image to be delisted is not used in any articles by the time of closure, it must be delisted."
Also, the standards have changed over time, so it's expected that photos are taken at a much higher resolution. --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 06:52, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- One of the guidelines states that
- Comment – noisy and oversaturated, I don't see posterization, I am Ok with the pixel count for older FPs. I like that it shows the lake, the other images in the article don't show it. I am neutral on the nom. Bammesk (talk) 16:50, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Delist - Unused Mattximus (talk) 19:18, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Weak delist - Its unused, but I think it should be used DannyS712 (talk) 06:13, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Delisted --Armbrust The Homunculus 10:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- Although there is no consensus to delist the image, it's unused and therefore can't retain its featured status. Armbrust The Homunculus 10:00, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
CG Heart
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 09:48:50 (UTC)
- Reason
- 3rd place POTY last year, obvious EV. Also, gotta dilute the birds a little bit for variety.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Cardiac cycle, Heart, and others
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Sciences/Biology
- Creator
- DrJanaOfficial
- Support as nominator – MER-C 09:48, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. Qono (talk) 22:56, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support, but it does freak me out. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 15:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 16:00, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 18:49, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - but agree with Adam - its a bit disconcerting to watch DannyS712 (talk) 04:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:33, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:CG Heart.gif --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:56, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Plumed Whistling Duck
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 09:11:27 (UTC)
- Reason
- High EV. Unusual visitor to my part of the country so unlikely to get another shot at it unless I travel.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Plumed whistling duck
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- JJ Harrison
- Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 09:11, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 10:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support –Yann (talk) 13:49, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 06:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support – Bammesk (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - DannyS712 (talk) 04:24, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:34, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Cwilson97 (talk) 16:37, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Dendrocygna eytoni - Macquarie University.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:52, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Pacific Reef Heron
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 09:08:43 (UTC)
- Reason
- I first saw species in Thailand in 2011, then I didn't see it again until last year. But it took until march this year to get a good photo. This species has both a light and a dark morph. This illustrates the dark morph well.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Pacific reef heron
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- JJ Harrison
- Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 09:08, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 10:07, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support –Yann (talk) 13:48, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 06:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Comment – I see posterization bands on upper right side of the image. Also wondering what that ghost-like background shadow is above the tail. Bammesk (talk) 15:55, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- (Adam Cuerden) You're correct. I think I derped and post processed in 8 bit instead of 16. I did it again and uploaded over the top. I can't comment about the darker bit of background near the tail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJ Harrison (talk • contribs)
- JJ Harrison, somehow the region where sky meets ground got worse, I see bands from x,y=(0,1900) to (4200,1400), they are minute, but there were none in your first upload. Bammesk (talk) 01:17, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Tried again. How is it now? JJ Harrison (talk) 10:20, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- JJ Harrison, somehow the region where sky meets ground got worse, I see bands from x,y=(0,1900) to (4200,1400), they are minute, but there were none in your first upload. Bammesk (talk) 01:17, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- (Adam Cuerden) You're correct. I think I derped and post processed in 8 bit instead of 16. I did it again and uploaded over the top. I can't comment about the darker bit of background near the tail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JJ Harrison (talk • contribs)
- Comment Can you ping me when you answer Bammesk, please? Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 15:57, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Sorry, just waiting on Bammesk. I figure there's no harm in getting things right. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 14:58, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 06:19, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - DannyS712 (talk) 06:12, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Egretta sacra.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:50, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Spotted Wood Owl
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 2 Apr 2019 at 09:04:36 (UTC)
- Reason
- High EV. Came out well for a fairly tricky back-lit scenario.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Spotted Wood Owl
- FP category for this image
- Wikipedia:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds
- Creator
- JJ Harrison
- Support as nominator – JJ Harrison (talk) 09:04, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support –Yann (talk) 13:46, 23 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support Original --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 06:53, 24 March 2019 (UTC); edited 18:10, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - blown highlights are significantly distracting. I may support if the background was darkened, leaving the highlights at 215 or thereabouts. MER-C 12:20, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Posted edit, but I oppose it. JJ Harrison (talk) 09:37, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose edit - it had come out worse than I anticipated. MER-C 20:03, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
- Posted edit, but I oppose it. JJ Harrison (talk) 09:37, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose – per MER-C, I would support if the background issue is addressed. Bammesk (talk) 15:42, 24 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support - Goveganplease (talk) 12:10, 25 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support either Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.5% of all FPs 22:10, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support both - DannyS712 (talk) 04:15, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- Oppose - blown highlights. Charlesjsharp (talk) 11:36, 28 March 2019 (UTC)
- @Yann, Walk Like an Egyptian, Goveganplease, and DannyS712: Could you clarify, which version(s) you support? Thanks. Armbrust The Homunculus 18:09, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
- I support the top version Goveganfortheanimals (talk) 00:00, 31 March 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Strix seloputo - Pasir Ris.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 09:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
- The original has 6 supports and 3 opposes, which is barely (66%) enough for promotion. Armbrust The Homunculus 09:48, 2 April 2019 (UTC)
Lucy Arbell in Massenet's Thérèse
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes. Voting period ends on 1 Apr 2019 at 14:25:50 (UTC)
- Reason
- It's a wonderful drawing. Admittedly, it's a stage of a poster we don't normally see, but I think that the actual art would probably have been degraded a bit as it went to poster, so this stage may well be the best option. Mainly stamp removal and scratch removal here.
- Articles in which this image appears
- Lucy Arbell, Thérèse (opera)
- FP category for this image
- WP:FP/THEATRE
- Creator
- Unknown, restored by Adam Cuerden
- Support as nominator – Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 6.4% of all FPs 14:25, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support –Yann (talk) 14:42, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. MER-C 18:23, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support --Walk Like an Egyptian (talk) 22:16, 22 March 2019 (UTC)
- Support. Abzeronow (talk) 16:48, 30 March 2019 (UTC)
Promoted File:Lucy Arbell in Massenet's Thérèse.jpg --Armbrust The Homunculus 20:30, 1 April 2019 (UTC)
Suspended nominations
This section is for Featured Picture (or delisting) candidacies whose closure is postponed for additional editing, rendering, or copyright clarification.