Commons:Featured picture candidates
Other featured candidates
📽️ Media
|
Featured picture candidates Featured picture candidates are images that the community will vote on, to determine whether or not they will be highlighted as some of the finest on Commons. This page lists the candidates to become featured pictures. The picture of the day images are selected from featured pictures. Old candidates for Featured pictures are listed here. There are also chronological lists of featured pictures: 2004, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018, 2019, 2020, 2021, 2022, 2023, 2024, 2025 and current month. For another overview of our finest pictures, take a look at our annual picture of the year election. |
|||||||||||||||||||
Formal thingsNominatingGuidelines for nominatorsPlease read the complete guidelines before nominating. This is a summary of what to look for when submitting and reviewing FP candidates:
Artworks, illustrations, and historical documentsThere are many different types of non-photographic media, including engravings, watercolors, paintings, etchings, and various others. Hence, it is difficult to set hard-and-fast guidelines. However, generally speaking, works can be divided into three types: Those that can be scanned, those that must be photographed, and those specifically created to illustrate a subject. Works that must be photographed include most paintings, sculptures, works too delicate or too unique to allow them to be put on a scanner, and so on. For these, the requirements for photography, below, may be mostly followed; however, it should be noted that photographs which cut off part of the original painting are generally not considered featurable. Works that may be scanned include most works created by processes that allow for mass distribution − for instance, illustrations published with novels. For these, it is generally accepted that a certain amount of extra manipulation is permissible to remove flaws inherent to one copy of the work, since the particular copy – of which hundreds, or even thousands of copies also exist – is not so important as the work itself. Works created to serve a purpose include diagrams, scientific illustrations, and demonstrations of contemporary artistic styles. For these, the main requirement is that they serve their purpose well. Provided the reproduction is of high quality, an artwork generally only needs one of the following four things to be featurable:
Digital restorations must also be well documented. An unedited version of the image should be uploaded locally, when possible, and cross-linked from the file description page. Edit notes should be specified in detail, such as "Rotated and cropped. Dirt, scratches, and stains removed. Histogram adjusted and colors balanced." PhotographsOn the technical side, we have focus, exposure, composition, movement control and depth of field.
On the graphic elements we have shape, volume, color, texture, perspective, balance, proportion, noise, etc.
You will maximise the chances of your nominations succeeding if you read the complete guidelines before nominating. Video and audioPlease nominate videos, sounds, music, etc. at Commons:Featured media candidates. Set nominationsIf a group of images are thematically connected in a direct and obvious way, they can be nominated together as a set. A set should fall under one of the following types:
Adding a new nominationIf you believe that you have found or created an image that could be considered valuable, with appropriate name, quality, image description, categories and licensing, then do the following. Step 1: copy the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box, for example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Your image filename.jpg. Then click on the "create new nomination" button. All single files: For renominations, simply add /2 after the filename. For example, Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Foo.jpg/2
All set nomination pages should begin "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/", e.g. "Commons:Featured picture candidates/Set/My Nomination".
Step 3: manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list: Click here, and add the following line to the TOP of the nominations list:
Galleries and FP categories: Please add a gallery page and section heading from the list at Commons FP galleries. Write the code as Page name#Section heading. For example: Optional: if you are not the creator of the image, please notify them using Note: Do not add an 'Alternative' image when you create a nomination. Selecting the best image is part of the nomination process. Alternatives are for a different crop or post-processing of the original image, or a closely related image from the same photo session (limited to 1 per nomination), if they are suggested by voters. VotingEditors whose accounts have at least 10 days and 50 edits can vote. Everybody can vote for their own nominations. Anonymous (IP) votes are not allowed. You may use the following templates:
You may indicate that the image has no chance of success with the template {{FPX|reason - ~~~~}}, where reason explains why the image is clearly unacceptable as a FP. The template can only be used when there are no support votes other than the one from the nominator. A well-written review helps participants (photographers, nominators and reviewers) improve their skills by providing insight into the strengths and weaknesses of a picture. Explain your reasoning, especially when opposing a candidate (which has been carefully selected by the author/nominator). English is the most widely understood language on Commons, but any language may be used in your review. A helpful review will often reference one or more of the criteria listed above. Unhelpful reasons for opposing include:
Remember also to put your signature (~~~~). Featured picture delisting candidatesOver time, featured picture standards change. It may be decided that for some pictures which were formerly "good enough", this is no longer the case. This is for listing an image which you believe no longer deserves to be a featured picture. For these, vote:
This can also be used for cases in which a previous version of an image was promoted to FP, but a newer version of the image has been made and is believed to be superior to the old version, e.g. a newly edited version of a photo or a new scan of a historical image. In particular, it is not intended for replacing older photos of a particular subject with newer photos of the same subject, or in any other case where the current FP and the proposed replacement are essentially different images. For these nominations, vote:
If you believe that some picture no longer meets the criteria for FP, you can nominate it for delisting, copying the image name into this box, after the text already present in the box: In the new delisting nomination page just created you should include:
After that, you have to manually insert a link to the created page at the top of Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list. As a courtesy, leave an informative note on the talk page(s) of the original creator, uploader(s), and nominator with a link to the delisting candidate. {{subst:FPC-notice-removal}} can be used for this purpose. Featured picture candidate policyGeneral rules
Featuring and delisting rulesA candidate will become a featured picture in compliance with following conditions:
The delisting rules are the same as those for FPs, with voting taking place over the same time period. The rule of the 5th day is applied to delisting candidates that have received no votes to delist, other than that of the proposer, by day 5. The FPCBot handles the vote counting and closing in most cases, current exceptions are candidates containing multiple versions of the image as well as FPXed and withdrawn nominations. Any experienced user may close the requests not handled by the bot. For instructions on how to close nominations, see Commons:Featured picture candidates/What to do after voting is finished. Also note that there is a manual review stage between when the bot has counted the votes and before the nomination is finally closed by the bot; this manual review can be done by any user familiar with the voting rules. Above all, be politePlease don't forget that the image you are judging is somebody's work. Avoid using phrases like "it looks terrible" and "I hate it". If you must oppose, please do so with consideration. Also remember that your command of English might not be the same as someone else's. Choose your words with care. Happy judging… and remember… all rules can be broken. See also
| |||||||||||||||||||
Table of contents
Featured picture candidates
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2025 at 14:34:52 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#Chile
Info created by NOIRLab/NSF/AURA/C. Corco, uploaded by OptimusPrimeBot, nominated by Yann
Support This is in Atacama desert, the driest nonpolar desert in the world, so I am surprised to see snow. And the light is nice. The Observatory is very small here, so I think it fits in "Natural". -- Yann (talk) 14:34, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support vip (talk) 15:44, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:48, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2025 at 13:16:21 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Fungi#Family_:_Strophariaceae
Info created, uploaded, nominated by George Chernilevsky -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 13:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2025 at 10:36:22 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues outdoors
Info created by TheBritinator – uploaded by TheBritinator – nominated by TheBritinator -- TheBritinator (talk) 10:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- TheBritinator (talk) 10:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2025 at 08:05:08 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Tunisia
Info created by Skander Zarrad – uploaded by Skander Zarrad – nominated by Ovva olfa -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 08:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 08:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:47, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2025 at 07:57:57 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Tunisia
Info created by Skander Zarrad – uploaded by Skander Zarrad – nominated by Ovva olfa -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 07:57, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 07:57, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment There are a lot of issues that need to be fixed. Vignetting, a noisy sky except central part, 1 dust spot in the upper right, 3 dust spots at left. -- George Chernilevsky talk 09:03, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- TheBritinator @George Chernilevsky The user has uploaded another version of the photo, which I believe resolves all the issues. Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 13:17, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback, I have made the necessary changes. Skander zarrad (talk) 14:25, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Lighting/shadows feels harsh, vignette is unatural, and there is visible dust spots on the left and right. I feel like these could be fixed, so I am open to changing my vote. TheBritinator (talk) 10:50, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you for the feedback, I have made the necessary changes. Skander zarrad (talk) 14:26, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2025 at 05:40:20 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1940-1949
Info created by Oren Jack Turner, restored, uploaded, and nominated by Yann
Info Previous nomination: Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Albert Einstein Head cleaned.jpg
Support -- Yann (talk) 05:40, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Don (talk) 00:13, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 13 Nov 2025 at 04:27:37 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Anser
Info created by Petro Stelte – uploaded by Petro Stelte – nominated by Petro Stelte -- Petro Stelte (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support I hope this image is better suited for FP than my previous nominations. I promise that this nomination will not be withdrawn until the end of the voting period. -- Petro Stelte (talk) 04:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 20:54:25 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants/Asparagales#Family : Amaryllidaceae
Info Flower of a garlic plant in a garden in Bavaria. All by me -- Ermell (talk) 20:54, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Ermell (talk) 20:54, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Pretty. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:42, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:33, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 08:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Good quality. TheBritinator (talk) 10:52, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 12:39, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:46, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 19:54:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles and fortifications/Germany#Rhineland-Palatinate
Info Pfalzgrafenstein Castle. All by me. -- Milseburg (talk) 19:54, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Milseburg (talk) 19:54, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support The existing Commons FP of this castle, File:Kaub, Castle Gutenfels, Castle Pfalzgrafenstein - 2.jpg, is probably a better composition, and File:Burg Pfalzgrafenstein 2017.jpg, which is an FP on German-language Wikipedia, has a more interesting view of the castle, but this photo is of excellent quality and has a restful composition, so I support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:49, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, I think the light here is special and the perspective avoids an overly busy background. Milseburg (talk) 06:21, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Very nice colours. --Petro Stelte (talk) 16:09, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 18:55:52 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Order : Tetraodontiformes
Info Halfmoon triggerfish (Sufflamen chrysopterum), Anilao, Philippines. It lives around seaward reefs and shallow lagoons in the tropical Indo-West Pacific area. It is solitary and is often found around coral looking for small invertebrates, like crustaceans and worms, on which it feeds. Note: there are no FPs on Commons of the genus Sufflamen. c/u/n by Poco a poco (talk) 18:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 18:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment At the moment this is your third active nommination, isn't it? --Milseburg (talk) 21:00, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- No, it isn't. I've only another one active that was nominated by me. Poco a poco (talk) 21:27, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- Yesterday Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Playa de Levante, Benidorm, España, 2014-07-02, DD 86.JPG was also still active. Milseburg (talk) 06:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- The rules here say that a nom is over after 5 days if it has got at least 10 supporting votes and no opposes. It's not essential when the bot tags it. Poco a poco (talk) 06:48, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- No, it isn't. I've only another one active that was nominated by me. Poco a poco (talk) 21:27, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Good to me. I assume that is part of a green background and not green CA on the upper tip of the uppermost fin. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:52, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, will improve that tonight CET Poco a poco (talk) 06:50, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 14:39:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Arthropods/Lepidoptera/Papilionidae#Genus_:_Battus
Info Female pipevine swallowtail (Battus philenor) fluttering at a flower in Tennessee. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 14:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 14:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Poco a poco (talk) 17:41, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 19:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 20:32, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 21:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:53, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 03:24, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 08:03, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:46, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 16:13, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 12:58:43 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Palaces#India
Info Neermahal also known as Twijilikma Nuyung (lit. 'Water Palace') is a former royal palace of Tripura Kingdom, built by Maharaja Bir Bikram Kishore Manikya bahadur in 1930. created by Kingshuk Mondal – uploaded by Kingshuk Mondal – nominated by Herpking -- Kingshuk Mondal (talk) 12:58, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kingshuk Mondal (talk) 12:58, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Poor detail, unteresting foreground. You would need several frames stitched to a panorama and a more interesting lighting to make out of it a FP Poco a poco (talk) 17:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment imo, a 20% crop above as well as below could save this image if it had high detail. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:09, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Lighting and detail is poor, sorry. TheBritinator (talk) 10:26, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 09:55:37 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family : Falconidae (Falcons, kestrels and caracaras)
Info One FP of a bird in the hand. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support I would have cropped more at the left side.--Ermell (talk) 11:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment I could (or anyone could) crop this type of image as you suggest, or crop it square which I do if the background is distracting. Many photographers like Commons' John Harrison tend to leave their images like this. If anything, I would crop at the right which is what I think you are suggesting. Charlesjsharp (talk) 14:53, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment I mean, I would have done it that way, but I think this solution is good too. In my opinion, it's a matter of taste.--Ermell (talk) 20:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support I like the present frame. -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 16:28, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 17:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:26, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:10, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Impressive, and a good composition to my eyes. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:57, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 03:26, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Don (talk) 00:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 08:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support TheBritinator (talk) 10:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 16:13, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 09:12:04 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Equidae (Equids)
Info created & uploaded by JoanaImages – nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:12, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:12, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Nice but cats about horses are requiredPoco a poco (talk) 17:38, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Very atmospheric image with beautiful light and nice depth layering in the morning mist. (The breed-specific category Free roaming ponies in New Forest was already added at upload and is correctly nested under category Equidae, which I consider sufficient.) -- Radomianin (talk) 18:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- You are right, I oversaw that. Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- (Overlooked. Oversaw means supervised.) Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:19, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- You are right, I oversaw that. Poco a poco (talk) 14:15, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 21:10, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support heylenny (talk/edits) 02:52, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support per Radomianin. This is a good example of a poetic photo whose haziness is part of why it's good. The sharpest things are probably that random shrub in front of the horse that's further to our right and some horse hair that sticks down. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:29, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 07:35, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 16:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 09:07:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Netherlands
Info created & uploaded by JoanaImages – nominated by Tomer T -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tomer T (talk) 09:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Good lighting conditions but unfortunately not sharp enough--Ermell (talk) 11:50, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Yes, FP potential for sure but too soft. On the right side there are also strange light traces Poco a poco (talk) 17:40, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:04, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Very captivating and technically impressive photograph, but unfortunately it is not detailed enough for FP, sorry. TheBritinator (talk) 10:29, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 12 Nov 2025 at 02:05:29 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Clothing and Textiles
Info created by Cvmontuy – uploaded by Cvmontuy – nominated by Cvmontuy -- Cvmontuy (talk) 02:05, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cvmontuy (talk) 02:05, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Simple but good.--Ermell (talk) 11:55, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 16:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Despite ISO 3200 wasnt necessary, could go half. --Mile (talk) 16:50, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- Are you talking about reducing the aperture or increasing the exposure time?, i was shooting without tripode --Cvmontuy (talk) 16:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment To reduce ISO. Math say if you keep f/8 and focal 24 mm, on ISO 1600 time would be 1/100s. Still much short than T= 1/focal --Mile (talk) 17:17, 3 November 2025 (UTC) p.S. Probably was set Manualy ?
- Yes, thanks! I usually set 1/200 for handheld shots. I’ll try to apply this rule from now on. Cvmontuy (talk) 17:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Yes, shutter speed could have been much slower to reduce ISO but I see no big issue here. Poco a poco (talk) 17:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. Nice pattern -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:27, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Looks great to me, with a striking and playful approach to patterns. -- Radomianin (talk) 18:35, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak support --Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 19:43, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. I really liked it. heylenny (talk/edits) 02:53, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support I like these kinds of compositions when they work and are sharp enough. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 07:36, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 08:07, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 16:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 21:20:20 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious buildings#Brazil
Info created and uploaded by Prburley – nominated by Falcão Alado -- Falcão Alado (talk) 21:20, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Falcão Alado (talk) 21:20, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Neutral A beautiful shot, but I think the depth of field could be better. The foreground is also a little too bright. --XRay 💬 07:40, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 20:48:30 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects#Others
Info created by MTur Destinos – initially uploaded by Sintegrity – cropped by Heylenny – nominated by Falcão Alado -- Falcão Alado (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Colorful and beautiful handmade artwork, representing the native people of the region. -- Falcão Alado (talk) 20:48, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment Interesting artworks, but they are partially hidden. Yann (talk) 20:54, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. I thought this was interesting too. But agree with Yann that they're a bit hidden. I tried to center them by cropping this image. Anyway, it's rare to see photos of the Amazonian art in its homeland (it was taken in Boa Vista, a city in the Amazon forest), even on Commons; I think it deserves some recognition, IMHO. heylenny (talk/edits) 21:58, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose The subject looks a little too soft for my taste --Cvmontuy (talk) 13:09, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Per Yann, and I would need more information to come to the conclusio that this is FP-worthy Poco a poco (talk) 17:30, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 13:54:18 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Cityscapes#Italy
Info created by Matteo Pappadopoli – uploaded by Matteo Pappadopoli – nominated by EUPBR -- EUPBR (talk) 13:54, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- EUPBR (talk) 13:54, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:19, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment @Matteo Pappadopoli What camera, EXIF ? --Mile (talk) 16:53, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Uoaei1 (talk) 05:32, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:56, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 16:11, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 10:37:01 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural#India
Info created and uploaded by Rainer Halama – nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:37, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 10:37, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:20, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Pretty and of decent quality but not outstanding to become one of our finest, sorry. Poco a poco (talk) 17:28, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Special to me. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)- Weak
Support Good composition, but some minor issues. The waterfall at the top is very bright. The highlights should be reduced. --XRay 💬 07:39, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 14:56, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Petro Stelte (talk) 16:07, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 10:21:03 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors#Tunisia
Info created by Atef Ouni – uploaded by Atef Ouni – nominated by TOUMOU -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 10:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 10:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose A bit of noise in darker areas but fine overall. What bothers me is the lack of symmetry. I'd have probably chose a lower POV to show more of the ceiling and also one step forward. There is also a disturbing shadow in the lower left part Poco a poco (talk) 17:47, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Beautiful, and justly a QI, but I think for FP, more of the pavilion should be in focus. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:14, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 05:35, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 06:44:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/People/Work#Vendors
Info created by Cheima Fezzani – uploaded by Cheima fezzani – nominated by TOUMOU -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 06:44, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 06:44, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 08:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:20, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:17, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Funny what you can find for sale in places like this one. jQuiz question: does anybody have any clue what broken light bulbs are good for so that people sell them? Poco a poco (talk) 17:44, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hi
- Generally people buy those things to fix similar things they have by parts of the item.
- Others buy those things to clean them and make decoration items for their surrounding in house or office IssamBarhoumi (talk) 19:31, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- I was able to reused a blown fluorescent lamp after modifying the original circuit. Yann (talk) 14:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Very interesting picture and well composed. I don't see the broken lightbulbs. Where are they in the picture? (I'm guessing they look different from the kinds of lightbulbs I'm used to seeing.) -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:23, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support I just like everything about this image. Brainandforce (talk) 08:26, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 16:10, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 05:27:27 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Pinaceae
Info Aekingerzand Drents-Friese Wold National Park. Pinus sylvestris on the sand drift.
All by -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:27, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 05:27, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Pristine! Wolverine X-eye 15:46, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:00, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Not an outstanding compo/subject IMHO, sorry Poco a poco (talk) 17:42, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I agree with you again. And no outstanding composition to make up for it, sorry. I understand why you like the photo, though, as 2 of the trees, particularly the one on the left, are individually interesting to look at. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:27, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Interesting contrast in colors between the evergreen trees, the yellow of the dry grass, and the purple flowers of the other shrubs. Good reproduction of the habitat of the sand dunes, imho. --Harlock81 (talk) 15:43, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 11 Nov 2025 at 04:51:25 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Germany
Info created by Plozessor – uploaded by Plozessor – nominated by Plozessor -- Plozessor (talk) 04:51, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Plozessor (talk) 04:51, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:00, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 13:11, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak support I believe that portrait format would have been better to show a piece of the interesting ceiling and less of the interesting sides shown here Poco a poco (talk) 17:49, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:28, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Good in detail and light. --Milseburg (talk) 19:59, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Rjcastillo (talk) 03:28, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 18:04:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1870-1879
Info created by Lock & Whitfield – restored, uploaded, and nominated by Adam Cuerden -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:04, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Adam Cuerden (talk) 18:04, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Info Forgot to link this for a few hours. Don't think long enough to screw with the process, but my apologies. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:41, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Very good photo of a historically important imperial British general. I wouldn't have thought the source would have been a page in a book until I checked it! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:02, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: There are books that paste in photographs, (in this case, Woodburytypes mounted under the paper, I believe). It was much more expensive, hence why we don't see it much. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:34, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- My father collected old books, so I'm familiar with that but just didn't expect this good an image to be from a book. Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:16, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Ikan Kekek: There are books that paste in photographs, (in this case, Woodburytypes mounted under the paper, I believe). It was much more expensive, hence why we don't see it much. Adam Cuerden (talk) 07:34, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 08:03, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:59, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ezarateesteban 12:26, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kelly zhrm (talk) 13:17, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:27, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 21:34:18 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Entertainment#Film
Info created by Gaumont Co. Ltd. – uploaded by Fæ – nominated by Ezarate -- Ezarateesteban 21:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Ezarateesteban 21:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- I'd be inclined to take the distortion from true 90° angles as just camera distortion and fix it, and neaten up the edges for width and ideally brightness. Otherwise, an excellent image with fairly minor damage. Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:51, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Adam Cuerden fixed, and scratches too, thanks! --Ezarateesteban 16:53, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Info The movie poster is based on this original photo. Regards, Christoph Braun (talk) 08:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support The picture is in my TODO list, but there is a lot of work. --Yann (talk) 20:55, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:16, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support I really like it. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:12, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 21:09:56 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals#Family : Camelidae (Camelids)
Info No FPs of this species. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:09, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment Charlesjsharp, the sun has reflected off your lens (I am forgetting the proper term). I've tagged the error. JayCubby (talk) 21:20, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, don't see what you mean, JayCubby. It looks like you've highlighted an area of worn skin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:48, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Charlesjsharp, the term is an infrared hotspot. Note the pink coloration of the tagged region. IR/near-IR light reflected off the lens is picked up by the camera as that pink region. The worn skin is coincidental. JayCubby (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Always something new to learn! And I can't blame Topaz this time. Many thanks. New version uploaded. Charlesjsharp (talk) 23:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- @Charlesjsharp, the term is an infrared hotspot. Note the pink coloration of the tagged region. IR/near-IR light reflected off the lens is picked up by the camera as that pink region. The worn skin is coincidental. JayCubby (talk) 22:55, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Sorry, don't see what you mean, JayCubby. It looks like you've highlighted an area of worn skin. Charlesjsharp (talk) 22:48, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support, thank you. JayCubby (talk) 00:12, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment Nice capture of the animal! There seems to be a tiny dark stray line somewhat to the left of the llama's head. More disconcerting to me are the apparent posterization lines in the clouds, some of them with a tint somewhere between pink and purple. These things are apparent only when zoomed to full size, but we want to do that to look at the details on the llama. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:11, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Bit of flying grass removed (Patagonia is a windy place) and also the pink hue. Charlesjsharp (talk)
- Since the flying grass was real, it could have been kept. The pink hue is reduced and subtler but still present. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 08:07, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:39, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --GRDN711 (talk) 15:53, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 23:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Awesome capture! Wolverine X-eye 03:46, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 07:02, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:58, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 11:25, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:22, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Felino Volador (talk) 16:32, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 18:29, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 07:39, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 15:34, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 21:10:28 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Carnivora#Genus : Lycalopex (South American foxes)
Info One nice FP from 2009 of the (much more orange/red) northern ssp. andinus. All by Charlesjsharp -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:10, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Charlesjsharp (talk) 21:10, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Beautifully done.
Support. I trust he'll be at en-wiki soon? Adam Cuerden (talk) 22:52, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Beautifully done.
Comment Pretty animal and clearly photographed, but it seems problematic that we can't see its tail at all. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:14, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 08:08, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Quality is fine but it doesn't look like a wildlife shot. Probably an animal looking for food from humans. The POV and the disturbing strong shadow are not helping, either Poco a poco (talk) 09:38, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Yes, unfortunately people do feed these foxes. This photo taken from my car window. Charlesjsharp (talk) 10:52, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
I withdraw my nomination I see now that the missing tail is a problem. Charlesjsharp (talk) 09:37, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 13:37:06 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors/Germany#Berlin
Info created, uploaded and nominated by FlocciNivis -- FlocciNivis (talk) 13:37, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- FlocciNivis (talk) 13:37, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Groupir ! (talk) 14:32, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:21, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 11:55:56 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Natural_phenomena#Crepuscular_rays
Comment A moody morning in Drenthe near Aalden. Visible are crepuscular rays. A diffraction effect can also be seen on the leaves on the left side, causing them to appear slightly bluish. Although this photo was created on the same morning as my previous FPC I think this photo shows a completely different side of the same morning.
Info all by me -- Tuxyso (talk) 11:55, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tuxyso (talk) 11:55, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:57, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:20, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Really interesting documentation, but it lacks the really good composition of the other FP. However, if others feel that the documentation element is sufficient for a feature or disagree with me about the composition, they should support. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:05, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 08:25:06 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Exteriors#Tunisia
Info all by me -- IssamBarhoumi (talk) 08:25, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Blurred nearest foreground at full size, but that's not the point. What makes this photo is light, atmosphere, foreground architecture and the hills. w:Impression, Sunrise is of course less realist than this photo, but the background in this photo reminds me a lot of that, in that the details of the landscape are less important than the light shining on them. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:41, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 11:44, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 13:34, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 16:01, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:19, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Very unsharp, and the light spot on the right side is too disturbing. Sorry. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 01:02, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Categorization could be better. --XRay 💬 07:42, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
- Hi
- I added a category "Ksour" to the photo it is a global category and it is the plural of the word "Ksar" in arbic. IssamBarhoumi (talk) 14:32, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 07:59:30 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Paridae_(Tits)
Info An Eurasian blue tit (Cyanistes caeruleus). c/u/n by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 07:59, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 07:59, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Very detailed, good composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:19, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 07:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment There is a blue CA around the beak, otherwise good. --Llez (talk) 13:33, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks, should be corrected ! Alexis Lours (talk) 14:16, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support OK now --Llez (talk) 06:00, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:15, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 16:18, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 07:53:25 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Anseriformes#Genus_:_Alopochen
Info A juvenile Egyptian goose (Alopochen aegyptiaca) at sunrise. c/u/n by Alexis Lours -- Alexis Lours (talk) 07:53, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Alexis Lours (talk) 07:53, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support The composition, depth of field and light are impressive. Strong candidate, in my opinion. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:21, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Cvmontuy (talk) 02:10, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:15, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 06:58:42 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious_buildings#Italy
Info The Basilica of San Vitale was completed in 526, while the bell tower, as we see it today, was partially rebuilt in two years (1696-1698), with the upper storey and roof. It was renovated several times due to the severe earthquakes that occurred over time. CUN by Terragio67 -- Terragio67 (talk) 06:58, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Terragio67 (talk) 06:58, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment I uploaded a new image, I apologize because this should have been the correct one, which highlights the details of the bell tower roof... --Terragio67 (talk) 08:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 11:44, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 01:36:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Plants#Family : Amaranthaceae
Info all by me -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 01:36, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 01:36, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Pretty plant, but the sharpness is not what we expect for featured pictures: look at examples of plant photos that have been featured recently. If this were a rare plant, this quality might be good enough for a feature, but w:Celosia argentea states that it's cultivated and that "in India and China it is known as a troublesome weed." -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:35, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose As per Ikan Kekek, --Cvmontuy (talk) 14:35, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 10 Nov 2025 at 00:33:55 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Settlements#Greece
Info created by Giles Laurent – uploaded by Giles Laurent – nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 00:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 00:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- TheNuggeteer (talk) 01:40, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 06:12, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment Quite pretty, and was it fortuitous that there was a woman dressed in a long blue dress in the foreground, or did you arrange that? Either way, it makes the picture even better! I feel like there's some noise in the background. Might you consider trying some noise reduction? -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:39, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Done Thank you! The woman dressed in a long blue dress was luck. New version with selective denoising uploaded. -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:58, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! Good improvement. The water still seems noisy, but the noisy spot that really seems incongruous now is the greenery behind the two domes that are further left. I feel like at least those areas of greenery should be denoised, but this nomination clearly doesn't require any more work to pass. Ikan Kekek (talk) 01:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support per Ikan. Yann (talk) 08:09, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:19, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 11:49, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:13, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:37, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Groupir ! (talk) 14:33, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Great capture! JayCubby (talk) 16:30, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support OK, this one's different. Wolverine X-eye 18:05, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 19:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 07:27, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:42, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Iconic scene, strong three-dome composition, clear blue/blue color echo (domes and dress). -- Radomianin (talk) 11:07, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 16:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:23, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment Very nice, but the horizon on the top right is obviously tilted and should be fixed.--Milseburg (talk) 19:39, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comment, I'll fix it this evening once I'm home -- Giles Laurent (talk) 07:48, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support The horizon must be horizontal. --XRay 💬 07:43, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Strong support Striking, and the blue dress really sends this one to the top. Brainandforce (talk) 08:38, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2025 at 17:40:13 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Natural/Italy#Trentino-Alto Adige
Info created, uploaded & nominated by kallerna —kallerna (talk) 17:40, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Rock cairns along the emerald waters of Lago di Braies, framed by the Dolomites, South Tyrol —kallerna (talk) 17:40, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment It would be great if you included some text about not stacking stones like this on the file pages. Nature organizations, parks and people caring about ecology, are unanimous in their calls for people to stop this infernal abuse of natural places. --Cart (talk) 19:21, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment I believe the right place for the disclaimer is in Cairn#Concerns. I fully agree that rock stacks are abuse of natural places, and have contributed knocking them down on my trips. They are particularly annoying in the wilderness. —kallerna (talk) 20:15, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- No harm in having the warning in several places, like on the file page too. Especially if this goes on to be a POTD. The warning does not appear on every language wiki about cairns, Italian wiki has no problem with creating these piles and other wikis use their "cairn page" as a disambiguation page. People usually don't follow links to read articles related to the photo. It's like having the warning about not taking photos on rail tracks; people don't mind having them on the individual file pages. --Cart (talk) 21:33, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- POTD could be used to raise awareness on the problem of cairns eg. on Earth Day. Feel free to edit the file page as needed. —kallerna (talk) 21:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- If this wasn't nominated at FPC then the issue would solve itself. We had a previous FPC which I said wasn't a proper cairn, but I was told I was wrong. Charlesjsharp (talk) 00:57, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- POTD could be used to raise awareness on the problem of cairns eg. on Earth Day. Feel free to edit the file page as needed. —kallerna (talk) 21:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support. I'm not too bothered by the cairns/rockpiles. JayCubby (talk) 16:31, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- They are ok to build in some places, like already damaged beaches next to the hotel at some well-used tourist location. The problem is that people take the same practice to places where moving stones will expose the topsoil to erosion. There are many sites in northern countries where plants and lichens grow slowly, and rearranging stones will impact the micro-fauna negatively. It's not just about the eyesore they are at pristine locations. We need to not leave "I was here!" calling cards wherever humans roam. --Cart (talk) 18:36, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful and good composition. FP to me. —UnpetitproleX (Talk) 17:00, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 11:43, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support For what it's worth, it's a very good photo and I'll stick to my principle that we need good photos of despicable things too for a good encyclopedia. I've sorted out the categories for these items and added a caution text. Photo is now also in the right section of the right article. --Cart (talk) 13:07, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent composition - pristine alpine beauty contrasted with the human trace of cairns. This image documents the problematic practice clearly because it's aesthetically strong. Encyclopedically valuable. FP for me. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:22, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:24, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I think several motifs on this picture (e.g. the cairns, the lake and the mountains) are featurable, but the lighting is not ideal and the overall composition doesn't work. It looks like the cairns and the lake are randomly cropped, and the peak far away in the background is dominated by the distracting large mountain on the left. If the cairns are the primary subject of this photo, you should've tried to make it more prominent (note that the cairns are barely a fifth of the picture and boxed into the bottom right corner). Furthermore, as a result of the suboptimal lighting, some of the cairns are overexposed, the colours around the sky and the peak look washed out, and the mountain on the left is under shadow. You would've probably got a much better composition with more pleasant light had you changed your angle of view by 90° counterclockwise (from southeastern to northeastern direction) and applied the rule of thirds to keep the cairns as the main subject in the lower third. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:35, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2025 at 17:31:02 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Doors
Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 17:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support I really like this composition. It's not entirely sharp at full size on my external monitor, but it doesn't have to be and is sharp at a big enough size. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:41, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:17, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:35, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 19:56, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:24, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry, I don't see anything special here. —kallerna (talk)
Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 20:15, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2025 at 16:10:08 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Belarus
Info This would be our first FP of a church in Belarus, a country that is understandably under-represented at FPC. created by Mike1979 Russia – uploaded by Mike1979 Russia – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support ― JayCubby (talk) 18:40, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose The cropping is too tight on the left, right, and especially at the bottom. As result is simply not wow. Perhaps a good VI -- George Chernilevsky talk 21:21, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I fully agree with this. The result is that my eye doesn't move well around the picture frame. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:10, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. Nice shot. Quality seems ok to me. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:25, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 17:08, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 07:44, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2025 at 16:10:35 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Places/Architecture/Palaces#Spain
Info I find this picture of an eighteenth century Spanish town hall to be satisfying and harmonious. It is already featured on the Spanish Wikipedia but in my opinion should be featured here too. No FPs of this subject. created by Poco a poco – uploaded by Poco a poco – nominated by Cmao20 -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Cmao20 (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:51, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Oh, what memories, thank you for this nom, cmao20! I applied some improvements. Poco a poco (talk) 17:11, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 19:55, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 15:59, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2025 at 08:31:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds#Family_:_Trochilidae_(Hummingbirds)
Info created by Giles Laurent – uploaded by Giles Laurent – nominated by Giles Laurent -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:31, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 09:07, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 15:03, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:44, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent Cmao20 (talk) 16:03, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful capture! Wolverine X-eye 16:21, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support per others. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:11, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support wow Terragio67 (talk) 07:14, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 08:10, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:16, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:20, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 07:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 09:44, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:18, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 13:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 9 Nov 2025 at 05:45:18 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Sculptures#Statues outdoors
Info c/u/n by GRDN711 (talk) 05:45, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- This sculpture commemorates the arrival of the Vikings to North America in approximately 1021 and was designed by New Brunswick artist, Karen Van Niekerk. It is made of corten steel, 10 millimeters thick and approximately 2.4 meters high.
- The Norse figures look southeast to symbolize their intent to use L’Anse aux Meadows as a base camp to explore further south from Newfoundland's Great Northern Peninsula.
- L'Anse aux Meadows is both a Canadian Historic Site and a UNESCO World Heritage Site.
- This sculpture commemorates the arrival of the Vikings to North America in approximately 1021 and was designed by New Brunswick artist, Karen Van Niekerk. It is made of corten steel, 10 millimeters thick and approximately 2.4 meters high.
Support -- GRDN711 (talk) 05:45, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support I feel like this is a very good photo of a silhouette and that the composition works pretty well. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:13, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment The sculpture sits on a hill overlooking the valley where the L’Anse aux Meadows base camp is located. I made other image versions that show the sculpture in context but feel this one works best for FP. - Made of corten steel, the sculpture is not black but a dark oxidized brown. The Norse brought weapons of corten steel with them. There were no clashes with the native peoples in Newfoundland, but steel weaponry would provide a significant advantage.
- Silhouettes have a long tradition as an art form but when used as a exterior sculpture monument, strongly suggest past history connected to the site. A similar silhouette sculpture that comes to mind is the pilgrims on the Alto del Perdón (Hill of Forgiveness) overlooking Paloma, on the Camino de Santiago (Way of St. James) in Navarra, Spain.
- A little extra - if you like a good movie where this Camino peregrino sculpture appears, the 2010 drama “The Way”, directed and written by Emilio Estevez, is worth watching. --GRDN711 (talk) 03:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Agree... Terragio67 (talk) 07:16, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:14, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:29, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:26, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- impressive. --Chronos.Zx (talk) 06:08, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 07:45, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2025 at 23:32:03 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1980-1989
Info created by Bernard Gotfryd – uploaded and restored by JayCubby – nominated by JayCubby
Info 1985 portrait of the neurologist and writer Oliver Sacks. His books are worth reading.
Support -- JayCubby (talk) 23:32, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment I find the crop of the fingers distracting. I'm unconvinced there's a better photo of him on Commons, but maybe some important historical figures should have valued images but no featured pictures. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:04, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Doing… Another photo in the works. JayCubby (talk) 14:12, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2025 at 08:37:06 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Castles_and_fortifications#Uzbekistan
Info Ota Darvaza aka "West Gates", Khiva (Ota Darvaza, Ата-дарваза). My shot. -- Mile (talk) 08:37, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mile (talk) 08:37, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:05, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Well lit and set off from the sky (the big shadows are fine and help the gates feel monumental), and the people help the composition. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:53, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:43, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment Very nice, but it feels tilted to me. Cmao20 (talk) 16:03, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment Yes, it is tilted to right on the right side, easy to correct --Llez (talk) 10:15, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Done @Cmao20, Llez --Mile (talk) 15:18, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support OK now --Llez (talk) 18:25, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 16:17, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:19, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Mounir TOUZRI (talk) 21:34, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
File:Emission nebulae in Auriga.jpg, featured
Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2025 at 11:33:02 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Nebulae
Info created, uploaded, and nominated by SimgDe -- SimgDe (talk) 11:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- SimgDe (talk) 11:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 13:52, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support There is no EXIF data, but I would like to know what equipment and settings you use. --Yann (talk) 18:47, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- It's not a picture that came out of a (single) camera. It's a composite from the Northern Sky Narrowband Survey containing data from thousands single exposures with a total exposure time of several days. SimgDe (talk) 20:53, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- It sounds like the picture is not your own work, and we should resolve the question of who should be credited in the "Source" line of the file page before judging the nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- It's completely my work. I (the author of the linked homepage) run the survey entirely by myself. SimgDe (talk) 09:14, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Like with so many other complicated photos, the exif is often lost along the way. However, it will add significantly to the file's value to have some info about how it's made on the files page, and not just via a link. Links get changed, or dissapear, over time while the files on Commons remain. One way of dealing with this, is to use the Template:Photo Information on the file page. You can see how it's used in this example. --Cart (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- No EXIF information was lost, because the special equipment did not generate this data. I tried to include the most relevant information in the description. Of course, I cannot repeat everything there. (Even the quite lengthy data release description on the project page is still incomplete.) However, if you notice any missing relevant information, please feel free to let me know. I replaced the reference to the project page with a landing page on my user profile, which additionally contains links to permanent resources. SimgDe (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Since you've also brought this up in my nomination, I'll also ask here: do you think it would be worth having a separate template for astronomical image information? There are some parameters that are difficult to translate into standard photographic terms (astronomical cameras often use gain instead of ISO to measure sensitivity) and others that are very relevant to astronomical imaging but not included in the template you linked (stack count, stack method, sensor temperature).
- Hopefully Commons gains support for FITS files in the future, which would also allow for astrometric data (celestial coordinates) to be available along with the image. Brainandforce (talk) 22:46, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Of course it would help if we had a good template for astro photos! :-) We are always eager to get as much info as possible about an image. I can't see that we have one now, but perhaps you and/or someone how knows about these things could create one. Here at FPC, we are mostly fed NASA photos, so we are a bit unaccustomed to having the privilege of speaking directly with the people who make these great photos. --Cart (talk) 23:30, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- I'm not super familiar with how templates work, but I'm definitely willing to give this a shot. Brainandforce (talk) 19:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- I can't help you with the technical question of template creation. But here are a few relevant pieces of information I often miss:
- 1a. Field of view
- 1b. Orientation
- 1c. Center position
- 2. Color assignment. (I would ask for channel mixing, because that is often omitted. This includes techniques link continuum subtraction.)
- 3. Other relevant processing steps, like star reduction.
- WCS data would replace 1a–1c and could be a game changer. The constellation is useful for quick orientation and could be auto-generated, but that's probably a more difficult task.
- Other information that is easy to obtain, like aperture or exposure time, is not really relevant because it is not meaningful without other information like transparency or background (noise). Such information only satisfies curiosity and should be optional. (The relevant information in this case would be the sensitivity in Rayleighs or an equivalent unit — but almost nobody determines that.)
- BTW, even in normal photography, much of the requested information is not meaningful. For example, the ISO setting says nothing if you don't use a fixed tonal curve. SimgDe (talk) 00:06, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- I can't help you with the technical question of template creation. But here are a few relevant pieces of information I often miss:
- I'm not super familiar with how templates work, but I'm definitely willing to give this a shot. Brainandforce (talk) 19:00, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Of course it would help if we had a good template for astro photos! :-) We are always eager to get as much info as possible about an image. I can't see that we have one now, but perhaps you and/or someone how knows about these things could create one. Here at FPC, we are mostly fed NASA photos, so we are a bit unaccustomed to having the privilege of speaking directly with the people who make these great photos. --Cart (talk) 23:30, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Do you mean that you did the entire survey by yourself? All the single exposures were shot by you? Ikan Kekek (talk) 15:37, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. SimgDe (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for clarifying, and sorry for misunderstanding before. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:10, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Yes. SimgDe (talk) 17:05, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Like with so many other complicated photos, the exif is often lost along the way. However, it will add significantly to the file's value to have some info about how it's made on the files page, and not just via a link. Links get changed, or dissapear, over time while the files on Commons remain. One way of dealing with this, is to use the Template:Photo Information on the file page. You can see how it's used in this example. --Cart (talk) 15:20, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- It's completely my work. I (the author of the linked homepage) run the survey entirely by myself. SimgDe (talk) 09:14, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- It sounds like the picture is not your own work, and we should resolve the question of who should be credited in the "Source" line of the file page before judging the nomination. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 02:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- It's not a picture that came out of a (single) camera. It's a composite from the Northern Sky Narrowband Survey containing data from thousands single exposures with a total exposure time of several days. SimgDe (talk) 20:53, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:32, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support I do find the lurid colours somewhat distracting but I understand that they are scientifically relevant because different emissions of gas have been mapped to different colours. As such I think this is interesting and beautiful Cmao20 (talk) 16:02, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- This is indeed a point. Often, the emission lines mapped to red (here: [OIII] = doubly ionized oxygen) and blue (here: [SII] = singly ionized sulfur) are swapped because this produces nicer colors and seems more natural. However, the eye is least sensitive to blue, so the important [OIII] information is lost. (On the other hand, [SII] is relatively boring because it strongly correlates with H-alpha / singly ionized hydrogen.) This is often solved by silently mixing [OIII] into green and H-alpha (ionized hydrogen) into red. SimgDe (talk) 17:29, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Wow -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:09, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Ermell (talk) 16:54, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Brainandforce (talk) 22:58, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Not of the tremendous size NASA can spoil us with, but quite beautiful, and with useful documentation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:16, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Terragio67 (talk) 07:20, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:13, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 13:15, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:30, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 11:11, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:34, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2025 at 07:16:14 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Estrildidae_(Estrildid_Finch)
Info All by -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 07:16, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 07:16, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support w:Red avadavat says that this is a "small finch", but does not give dimensions, so if you know them, please edit that article. In any event, I know what the sizes of some other finches are, so it's obvious that this is an impressive closeup. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:08, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- By the way, if you look through Category:Quality images of Amandava amandava, you'll see that most of them are by Tisha Mukherjee, and they are amazing! -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:13, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you so much, I have added the approximate dimensions in the article, you may check. Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:49, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks. I'm even more impressed with this photo, now that I know how small this bird is. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 08:00, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Beautiful little bird Cmao20 (talk) 16:00, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 16:10, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 08:11, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 10:13, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 13:32, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Excellent detail and striking composition. --Tagooty (talk) 05:53, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 13:11, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 15:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Radomianin (talk) 19:28, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Marvelous. Wolverine X-eye 03:49, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 12:30, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
IC 10 (near infrared and visible light)
Voting period ends on 8 Nov 2025 at 06:36:12 (UTC)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page
-
The nearby starburst galaxy IC 10 in visible light with enhanced H-alpha emission (HaRGB palette). Star forming regions are visible in pink. Thick interstellar dust in the Milky Way dims and reddens IC 10.
-
IC 10 in a mixture of near infrared and visible light with enhanced H-alpha emission (HaIRG palette). Star forming regions are green, and some cool red M-type stars appear significantly brighter than in the HaRGB image.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Astronomy#Galaxies
Info created, uploaded, and nominated by brainandforce – Brainandforce (talk) 06:36, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Brainandforce (talk) 06:36, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Great! How long is the exposure for these? Yann (talk) 18:51, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- About 30 hours across all bands (7.75 hours H-alpha, 7.2 hours IR, 5 hours each of RGB) with an 8" telescope. IC 10 is obscured by thick interstellar dust in the Milky Way, so it's extremely demanding in terms of integration time. Brainandforce (talk) 22:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:32, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment Like with so many other complicated photos, the exif is often lost along the way. May I suggest that you use the Template:Photo Information on the file page. You can see how it's used in this example. --Cart (talk) 15:24, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks for letting me know about this! There isn't normal EXIF data with the FITS files used in astronomical image processing, and SIRIL doesn't add it to JPEG exports, but I can fill a lot of that in manually. Brainandforce (talk) 22:11, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support A good set - a nice illustration not just of the nebula but of the techniques used to capture these images Cmao20 (talk) 16:00, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Interesting documentation. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:18, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support for the set. Rare mix of photographic discipline and educational value. Long integration translates into clarity and nuance, and the two versions complement each other. -- Radomianin (talk) 21:10, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2025 at 22:08:26 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Fish#Order : Perciformes (Perch-like Fishes)
Info Yellowbar angelfish (Pomacanthus maculosus), Ad Dimaniyat Islands, Oman. This marine angelfish is distributed throughout the Persian Gulf, the northwestern Indian Ocean, and the Red Sea south to 19°S. It's found at depths of between 4 and 50 metres (13 and 164 ft) and is a solitary species that lives in sheltered areas, often where there is a mixture of coral and silt. Their diet is dominated by sea sponges and tunicates, although other invertebrates will be eaten opportunistically. The females attain sexual maturity when the reach around 5.5 years of age and a total length of 21.6 centimetres (8.5 in). The maximum longevity is thought to be 36 years old. They are protogynous hermaphrodites and the older females can change sex to become males when there is a shortage of males. The larvae are planktonic. The yellowbar angelfish is occasionally collected for the aquarium trade and in some parts of the Persian Gulf it has been recorded in fish markets. Poco a poco (talk) 22:08, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Poco a poco (talk) 22:08, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 18:53, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Very impressive detail when viewed at full size Cmao20 (talk) 03:16, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support per Cmao20. Good composition, too. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:32, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 10:32, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 15:40, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- per Cmao20 and Ikan. Acroterion (talk) 02:24, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Tight crop left side and at least you could clear CA (noted). --Mile (talk) 15:22, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
- Mile: Easy fix,
Done Poco a poco (talk) 22:35, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Comment @Poco a poco you did half, and left half CA. Also now you spoiled bottom using hard brush (see note). Normally you dont use that tool here. Minus will stay due to tight crop in anycase. You rush too much. --Mile (talk) 12:15, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
- Mile: Easy fix,
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:17, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --LexKurochkin (talk) 06:55, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 15:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 12:03, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2025 at 11:01:40 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Interiors/Religious_buildings#Uzbekistan
Info Enlighted. Tuman Oko complex, Shah-i-Zinda, Samarkand (комплекс Туман Око, Самарканд; Tuman Oko majmuasi). My shot. -- Mile (talk) 11:01, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Info Captured this shot till tourists group pour in. Very good for ISO 2500.
Support -- Mile (talk) 11:01, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support JayCubby (talk) 23:41, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Washed out door and front center. --Tagooty (talk) 05:59, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Info @Tagooty sometime you have to understand the picture. Low-key, high-key and similar. --Mile (talk) 08:38, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I understand the intention behind the light shining through the open door. However, I think it looks more like a poorly exposed door than an intentional design choice. Sorry. --XRay 💬 13:54, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry but per XRay, while I see what you were trying to do here, the blown highlights of the door are just too distracting for me Cmao20 (talk) 15:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Sorry. This is a very useful photo and may be a worthy VI candidate because it may indeed be difficult or impossible to take a better photo of these wonderful ornaments. However this does not necessarily make it a FP. You may have found the best possible solution, nevertheless because of the unfavourable circumstances this is neither a high key nor a low key photo or something similar, the door is (unavoidably) just blown. – Aristeas (talk) 18:27, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Юрий Д.К. 14:34, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:34, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose per XRay & Aristeas. Sorry. -- Екатерина Борисова (talk) 01:08, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support For me, the blown-out door is a critical feature of this image. It really drives home the contrast between the exterior daylight and the shaded interior. Brainandforce (talk) 08:32, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Per above Poco a poco (talk) 11:48, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 7 Nov 2025 at 05:42:44 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Animals/Mammals/Artiodactyla#Family_:_Cervidae_(Deer)
Info All by -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 05:42, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 05:42, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment I miss some contrast here. Probably too high ISO. --Mile (talk) 11:11, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Good quality. Wolverine X-eye 15:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)- I think the settings are not well chosen. There is no reason to have 1/1,250 sec, f/11, and ISO 6,400. 1/625 sec, f/8, and ISO 1,600 would have been better. Yann (talk) 17:14, 29 October 2025 (UTC)fine,
- I wouldn't choose 1/625 for a moving animal but I know nothing about 800mm lenses on tripods. Perhaps the lens is the cause of the softness, or perhaps the focus was missed? We don't always have time to select the ideal settings and I do use auto ISO when there are dark and lighter areas. Auto ISO doesn't always do what you want. Charlesjsharp (talk) 17:57, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- I was doing bird photography that's why exposure time 1/1,250 sec was set and suddenly found this dear while on a boat. The lens is a budget one and has a fixed aperture of f11 and as @Charlesjsharp: said, I keep the ISO on auto too. This is a handheld shot from a moving boat, no tripod was used. I just described the scenario. Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:33, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Info I have two user settings on my camera: U1 is for perched birds and stationary/slow-moving animals (f/8, auto ISO, center metering, spot focus) and U3 for birds in flight (1/1600 s, spot metering, tracking auto-focus, higher range on auto ISO). It takes barely a second to switch the mode dial to one of these modes. For slow-moving animals, I find that U1 with panning works well. --Tagooty (talk) 14:31, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thank you, I will try to utilize those. Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:59, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- It was shot with a Canon RF 800mm f/11 lens, so that's the largest aperture you have to work with - there's no f/8 for that lens, nor for any 800mm lens much under the price of a new car. Acroterion (talk) 23:55, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks that's useful information.
Support then. Yann (talk) 16:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks that's useful information.
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:35, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support-- E.IMANCOMMONS 21:16, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment Very good photo, overall. I like the composition. I think File:Chital in Sanjay Dubri Tiger Reserve December 2024 by Tisha Mukherjee 01.jpg shows more detail, though, and is also a good composition, so regardless of whether this nomination passes or fails, I recommend nominating that photo. Looking through Category:Quality images of Axis axis, I also saw more detail in File:A spotted deer or Chital (fawn) in Jim Corbett National park (side view).jpg, though I could imagine a nomination of it having trouble because of distracting grass or the ears being just slightly out of focus (I'd probably support a nomination, though). -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:58, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- I will surely nominate that photo of mine. Thank you. Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 07:10, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- Sure thing. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 04:44, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- I will surely nominate that photo of mine. Thank you. Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 07:10, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- Very
Weak support, nice light and the composition is excellent but the image indeed is rather soft. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:13, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support A bit small but yeah, composition is great Cmao20 (talk) 15:56, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support – Aristeas (talk) 18:33, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Yes, the composition is excellent, and the photo is quite good, but I don't think the chital is quite sharp or detailed enough for a feature. I guess no-one else agrees. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:25, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Quality is not good enough for FP. Chital are common and easily photographed animals. --Tagooty (talk) 05:56, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2025 at 23:16:25 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Plants#Family_:_Pinaceae
Info created, uploaded and nominated by FlocciNivis -- FlocciNivis (talk) 23:16, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- FlocciNivis (talk) 23:16, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment My first thought was that the top crop was closer than I prefer over the tree, but there are a bunch of dust spots, so until they are eliminated, this photo is not yet ready for FP consideration. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:44, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- I removed them now -- FlocciNivis (talk) 13:52, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- You did. It's a very good photo, but I still wish there were more room above the tree. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:48, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- I removed them now -- FlocciNivis (talk) 13:52, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Agree the top crop is tight but I really like the idea of this single tree above the cloud layer Cmao20 (talk) 15:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:23, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2025 at 18:28:35 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Transport##Train_stations
Info Cologne Station at nighttime; created, uploaded, nominated by -- Superbass (talk) 18:28, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Superbass (talk) 18:28, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Just Wow! - amazing colors, perfect sharpness, and a nice light trail. -- Radomianin (talk) 19:34, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 21:11, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Poco a poco (talk) 07:34, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 08:19, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Olfa Yakoubi -ألفة يعقوبي (talk) 08:57, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Compo so-so. You have also some burnt pixles. I dont much + on driving train. CA-fence --Mile (talk) 11:14, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Frank Schulenburg (talk) 14:31, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Stunning, makes the station look much more beautiful and impressive than I remember it from the many times I changed trains there. – Aristeas (talk) 15:25, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:35, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Composition is satisfying to me. Really good light handling. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:42, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support I like the composition, lighting, color, and choice to show the motion of the train. Acroterion (talk) 02:21, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 09:40, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 13:55, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:45, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Fascinating colours and light Cmao20 (talk) 15:53, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Terragio67 (talk) 07:35, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 6 Nov 2025 at 09:49:33 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Objects/Architectural elements#Walls
Info All by me. -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:49, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 09:49, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment Super ke beše ama na sonce slikano. --Mile (talk) 11:15, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- Променливо облачно се погоди, но барем нема сенка. --Kiril Simeonovski (talk) 11:31, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support I like this.--Famberhorst (talk) 17:44, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:34, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Interesting Cmao20 (talk) 15:53, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --B. Jankuloski (talk) 19:39, 31 October 2025 (UTC) Lovely.
Oppose I approve of the subject of this photo, and I think it's valuable and good. I don't think it's your fault that this motif lacks a composition that satisfies me, but it doesn't (as usual in such cases, my eyes don't move smoothly around the picture frame), and it's on that basis that I oppose a feature, but I may be wrong, and the clear documentation of this type of house interior might be a sufficient reason to feature. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:30, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 22:31, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2025 at 16:01:33 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Religious buildings#Germany
Info created by Superbass – uploaded by Superbass – nominated by Superbass -- Superbass (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Neutral -- Superbass (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Ermell (talk) 16:12, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Well-balanced composition and perspective, with beautiful blue hour light accentuating the cathedral's structure. -- Radomianin (talk) 17:00, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:24, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support The flanking (side) buildings draw the eye towards the Cathedral, creating a strong sense of depth and proportion, while the color tones are pleasant, complementary, believable and without excessive noise: a superb composition. --Terragio67 (talk) 18:24, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support The small white scaffolding on the right side is a bit distracting, but in my view, it hardly detracts from the otherwise excellent composition and very high technical quality of the shot. I especially like the blue sky shining through behind the left tower — really well done. —Tuxyso (talk) 22:05, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:07, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:47, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- George Chernilevsky talk 08:21, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:18, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Acroterion (talk) 12:19, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:32, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:45, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support A shame that you were off-centered (maybe 2 meters to far to the left) but anyhow good compo, detail and lighting Poco a poco (talk) 18:18, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Strong support Great. – Aristeas (talk) 21:01, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose Beautiful shot, but I miss the "wow" factor here. The angle doesn't do justice to one of the most stunning churches in the world, IMO. Also, there's a slight lens flare on the right, and those buildings seem more distracting than complementary. heylenny (talk/edits) 06:34, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment Exactly, a photographer’s bag should always include at least a crane with a wrecking ball, a tank plus ammunition, and some stocks of explosive to get rid of misplaced cars, ugly buildings and other distracting stuff. When you first demolish all the mediocre rubbish around it, you can take much better photos of Cologne Cathedral. – Aristeas (talk) 15:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- True - some photographers just lack the demolition permit for better compositions :D -- Radomianin (talk) 19:40, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment Explanation for secret services plus other people and AI agents who/which don’t understand irony and sarcasm: the previous comment was a joke. – To state it plainly: It’s not the photographer’s guilt that large parts of Cologne are not exactly beautiful and do not provide a suitable setting for the wonderful Cathedral and other churches. Just like in other cities, these are the consequences of the destruction in World War II and of the rapid, often less than aesthetically pleasing rebuilding in the 1950s and 1960s. Photographing a magnificent building, a pretty person, etc. against an elegant or neutral background is rather easy; things get exciting in reality, which often doesn’t provide perfect circumstances and backcloths. Then the art of photography consists in the ability to make the best of difficult situations and to incorporate even ugly surroundings into the picture through clever composition in such a way that it does not destroy the beauty and dignity of the subject, but rather highlights it through the contrast, just as a diamond shines even brighter in the dark mud. This has been achieved brilliantly in this photograph, which is why I consider it all the more important. – Aristeas (talk) 15:17, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support-- E.IMANCOMMONS 21:18, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support per others. Impressive quality in low light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 23:15, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --XRay 💬 14:00, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support honestly I do think the lighting is kind of harsh/unattractive but the quality and composition are good Cmao20 (talk) 03:09, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:42, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support That medieval perspective makes Cologne look like Strasbourg with an additional tower. --Seewolf (talk) 12:42, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2025 at 15:27:31 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Places/Architecture/Bridges#Italy (see also Category:Featured pictures of Venice)
Info created, uploaded & nominated by kallerna —kallerna (talk) 15:27, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Venice’s iconic Rialto bridge glowing in the warm sunset light —kallerna (talk) 15:27, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support — Chris Woodrich (talk) 17:26, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support The light really emphasizes the bridge. --UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:15, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support. heylenny (talk/edits) 06:18, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 20:33, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support-- E.IMANCOMMONS 21:19, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose The image composition is good, but I find the lighting very unfavorable. In my opinion, too many elements in the foreground are in shadow. Sorry. --XRay 💬 14:02, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- The idea is to light up the bridge. This kind of light is only possible during this time of the year, when the sunset light is parallel with Grande Canal. I've lived in Venice a year, and it is the best kind of illumination I've seen on Rialto. —kallerna (talk) 16:46, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- As I mentioned, the light is what stood out to me, though I do think some of the foreground water could be cropped for a compo with the bridge in center. But it is also good to me as is. UnpetitproleX (Talk) 22:18, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- The idea of highlighting the bridge with light is a good one. I noticed that too. I just think the area in shadow is too large. --XRay 💬 06:11, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- IMO the aspect ratio becames too wide with the proposed crop. The water is anyways reflecting the palazzos of Grand Canal, so the shadow is not too dark. However, no shadows on the summer view. —kallerna (talk) 10:07, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
- The idea is to light up the bridge. This kind of light is only possible during this time of the year, when the sunset light is parallel with Grande Canal. I've lived in Venice a year, and it is the best kind of illumination I've seen on Rialto. —kallerna (talk) 16:46, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
Support I enjoy the contrast between light and shade Cmao20 (talk) 03:07, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Me too, and I like the warm light. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 03:52, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 07:55, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose The shadowed foreground is too dominant. --Milseburg (talk) 19:35, 3 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 5 Nov 2025 at 07:40:51 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Non-photographic media/Religion#Hinduism
Info created by an unknown painter, photographed by the British Museum – uploaded by Aavindraa – nominated by UnpetitproleX (Talk) 07:40, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- UnpetitproleX (Talk) 07:40, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Discussion about sourcing and colour grading
|
|---|
*
|
Support --Yann (talk) 05:26, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Llez (talk) 07:44, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:12, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:30, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Further discussion about sourcing and colour grading; struck !votes
|
|---|
|
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 13:57, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 03:06, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:41, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2025 at 19:45:31 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Photo techniques/Black and White#Structures
Info created by Elson Sempé Pedroso – uploaded and nominated by Heylenny -- heylenny (talk/edits) 19:45, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- heylenny (talk/edits) 19:45, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Question - There's a fair bit of noise (or grain?). Any idea what happened here? — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:55, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- This photo was very pixelated and I tried to fix it with the RAW file in Photoshop, but I think it got worse. I'll upload another file that the photographer sent me. heylenny (talk/edits) 13:55, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- Ah, compression. Alright. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:49, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- This photo was very pixelated and I tried to fix it with the RAW file in Photoshop, but I think it got worse. I'll upload another file that the photographer sent me. heylenny (talk/edits) 13:55, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support I really like it. Yann (talk) 15:38, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- Thanks! heylenny (talk/edits) 15:39, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support - I also like this one. It would be nice to not have the noise, but overall I think it is acceptable; gives the impression of high-grain film, which works with B&W. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:49, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 16:29, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Weak oppose The subject is interesting but I think it would have been more interesting going for a symmetric shot. Resolution and detail are also poor. Poco a poco (talk) 18:47, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose I more or less agree with this. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:03, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- "this" what? heylenny (talk/edits) 06:04, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
- All of what Poco said, except for the resolution, which seems fine. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 00:03, 30 October 2025 (UTC)
- "this" what? heylenny (talk/edits) 06:04, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose Also agree - image quality seems quite low and it's a real shame it's not centred, this is a composition that cries out for symmetry. Cmao20 (talk) 03:02, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
- I disagree. The composition at this angle is what seems to work here. Also, a crop wouldn't make that much difference. Quality gives the impression of high-grain film, as Chris said... heylenny (talk/edits) 03:07, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 09:54, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment The off-centre angle works well for the object, IMO, but I would have shot it a bit more clockwise so that the barely visible top edge of the pentagon runs parallel to the top edge of the image. What bothers me more is that the monochrome image is saved as RGB, so the noise doesn't appear monochrome. Furthermore, I find the upper areas a little too burnt out, but presumably there is no more detail in the raw data. I would at least have reduced the exposure more during development, as there are no depths that can be lost. --Syntaxys (talk) 16:58, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support --EUPBR (talk) 15:53, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- I really apreciate it! :D Falcão Alado (talk) 20:57, 2 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Nice pic of a relevant monument. Sintegrity (talk) 00:43, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Nice shadows Otávio Astor Vaz Costa (talk) 00:54, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2025 at 19:10:48 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured_pictures/Animals/Birds/Passeriformes#Family_:_Parulidae_(New_World_Warblers)
Info Yellow-rumped warbler (Setophaga coronata) on a duckweed-covered pond. all by — Rhododendrites talk | 19:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Support — Rhododendrites talk | 19:10, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Tisha Mukherjee (talk) 06:14, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Comment - I like it, but it feels like the crop would work better with a bit more space on the viewer's left. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 12:56, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Yann (talk) 05:28, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Harlock81 (talk) 17:42, 28 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Quite a small bird - average length of 14 cm per Wikipedia - high degree of detail and nice composition. I'm OK with the crops. -- Ikan Kekek (talk) 06:01, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Agree that no crop is needed Cmao20 (talk) 03:01, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Support The portrait of the bird is beautifully done, rich in detail and harmonious in composition. --Syntaxys (talk) 16:44, 1 November 2025 (UTC)
Support Christian Ferrer (talk) 08:17, 4 November 2025 (UTC)
Voting period is over. Please don't add any new votes.Voting period ends on 4 Nov 2025 at 08:14:13 (UTC) (unless closed by the 5th-day rule)
Voters must check: File name · Quality · Image description · License · Categories (what, where, who, when)
Visit the nomination page to add or modify image notes.
- Gallery: Commons:Featured pictures/Historical/People#1930-1939
Info created probably by Buck Barrow, Clyde's brother, published by the FBI, uploaded by JayCubby, nominated by Yann
Support Historically significant. -- Yann (talk) 08:14, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Support Cmao20 (talk) 18:49, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Support JayCubby (talk) 20:37, 26 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --Famberhorst (talk) 05:40, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support--Agnes Monkelbaan (talk) 10:27, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Oppose - I'm not sure this is free. The copyright would have belonged to the anonymous photographer; they would not be posing like this for lawmen. Assuming the works were legally published, the Hirtle Chart would assume public domain. However, our definition of "publish" under US copyright law indicates that "the right to publish a work is an exclusive right of the copyright owner [and] violating this right (e.g. by disseminating copies of the work without the copyright owner's consent) is a copyright infringement". Unless the photographer gave his consent (doubtful), the FBI would have committed a copyright violation, and if that is true this might technically be "unpublished" and thus only enter the public domain 120 years after fixation. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 13:23, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- Why do you think the FBI needs a permission? They publish pictures of "wanted" people all the time without bothering about the copyright. Yann (talk) 15:33, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- Mere reproduction of a photograph by a US agency does not mean copyright is owned by the US agency. Commons:Copyright rules by territory/United States#Works by the US Government, first point, is similar: "Images on government or government agency websites are not necessarily public domain; always look for copyright notices or similar." The fact that the FBI reproduced this photograph does not mean that they had the copyright, or that they were the creator. As I am understanding US copyright law, as a non-legal professional, the fact that the FBI reproduced the image does not affect the creator's right to enjoy their rights over their works. Obviously, nobody is going to sue, but COM:PCP deems that to be insufficient for hosting here. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:01, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- OK, I changed the license. Now that's not what the license claims. The license says that it was published by the FBI without a copyright notice (and no copyright was renewed), therefore it is in the public domain. Beside the FBI, it was probably published by dozens of newspapers or magazines, and never renewed. Yann (talk) 16:05, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
- I've started a deletion discussion, so I won't go into further detail here, but I do want to explicitly quote the original license: "This image or file is a work of a Federal Bureau of Investigation employee, taken or made as part of that person's official duties. As a work of the U.S. federal government, the image is in the public domain in the United States." (emphasis mine) The license and existing policy clearly requires a work to be created by the US government employee to use the original license. This new license will depend on whether the FBI's reproduction of an image without consent constitutes publication.
- On a non-copyright front, I think this is a wonderful image, and I do hope that someone with more legal knowledge can cite a case that renders my concerns moot. However, until we have settled the copyright, I can't in good conscience vote to support. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 16:20, 27 October 2025 (UTC)
Support --MZaplotnik(talk) 06:47, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support – Aristeas (talk) 16:04, 29 October 2025 (UTC)
Support -- Giles Laurent (talk) 08:35, 31 October 2025 (UTC)
Timetable (day 5 after nomination)
Thu 30 Oct → Tue 04 Nov Fri 31 Oct → Wed 05 Nov Sat 01 Nov → Thu 06 Nov Sun 02 Nov → Fri 07 Nov Mon 03 Nov → Sat 08 Nov Tue 04 Nov → Sun 09 Nov
Timetable (day 9 after nomination, last day of voting)
Sun 26 Oct → Tue 04 Nov Mon 27 Oct → Wed 05 Nov Tue 28 Oct → Thu 06 Nov Wed 29 Oct → Fri 07 Nov Thu 30 Oct → Sat 08 Nov Fri 31 Oct → Sun 09 Nov Sat 01 Nov → Mon 10 Nov Sun 02 Nov → Tue 11 Nov Mon 03 Nov → Wed 12 Nov Tue 04 Nov → Thu 13 Nov
Closing a featured picture promotion request
The bot
Note that the description below is for manual closure, this is mostly not needed anymore as there exists a bot (FPCBot) that counts the votes and handles the process below. However after the bot has counted the votes a manual review step is used to make sure the count is correct before the bot again picks up the work.
Manual procedure
Any experienced user may close requests.
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line with a space first)(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:The Bridge (August 2013).jpg). See also {{FPC-results-reviewed}}.
{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=x|oppose=x|neutral=x|featured=("yes" or "no")|gallery=xxx (leave blank if "featured=no")|sig=~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag featured or not featured – for example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], featured === - Save your edit.
- If it is featured:
- Add the picture to the list of the four most recently featured pictures of an appropriate gallery of Commons:Featured pictures, list as the first one and delete the last one, so that the number is four again.
- Also add the picture to the appropriate gallery and section of Commons:Featured pictures, list. Click on the most appropriate link beneath where you just added it as one of the four images. An image should only appear ONE time in the galleries. After a successful nomination, the image can be placed in several of the Featured pictures categories.
- Add the template {{Assessments|featured=1}} to the image description page.
- If it was an alternative image or part of a set nomination, use the com-nom parameter. For example, if File:Foo.jpg was promoted at Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:Bar.jpg, use {{Assessments|featured=1|com-nom=Bar.jpg}}
- If the image is already featured on another Wikipedia, just add featured=1 to the Assessments template. For instance {{Assessments|enwiki=1}} becomes {{Assessments|enwiki=1|featured=1}}
- Add the picture to the chronological list of featured pictures. Put it in the gallery using this format: File:xxxxx.jpg|# '''Headline'''<br>created by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], uploaded by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]], nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
- The # should be replaced by 1 for the first image nominated that month, and counts up after that. Have a look at the other noms on that page for examples.
- You may simplify this if multiple things were done by the same user. E.g.: File:xxxxx.jpg|# '''Headline'''<br>created, uploaded, and nominated by [[User:xxxxx|xxxxx]]
- Add == FP promotion ==
{{FPpromotion|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the talk page of the nominator. For set nominations, use:
== Set Promoted to FP ==
<gallery>
File:XXXXXX.jpg
File:XXXXXX.jpg
</gallery>
{{FPpromotionSet2|YYYYY}}, using the names of the set files instead of the XXXXXX and the title of the set instead of YYYYY. - Add == FP promotion ==
{{FPpromotedUploader|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the talk page of the user who has uploaded the image, if that user is not the same as the nominator. - Add == FP promotion ==
{{FPpromotedCreator|File:XXXXX.jpg}} to the talk page of the creator, if the author is a different Commons user than nominator and uploader.
- As the last step (whether the image is featured or not; including {{FPX}}ed, {{FPD}}ed and withdrawn nominations), open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination you've just finished closing. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2025), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
Closing a delisting request
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
Add the result of the voting at the bottom (on a new line):
{{FPC-delist-results-reviewed|delist=x|keep=x|neutral=x|delisted=yes/no|sig=~~~~}}
(for example see Commons:Featured picture candidates/removal/File:Ensifera ensifera (22271195865).jpg) - Also edit the title of the delisting candidate image template and add after the image tag
delisted or not delisted
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] === becomes === [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], delisted === - Move the actual template from Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list to the bottom of the actual month page on Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2025.
- If the outcome was not delisted, stop here. If it is delisted:
- Remove the picture from Commons:Featured pictures, list and any subpages.
- Edit the picture's description as follows:
- In the {{Assessments}} template on the image description page, change featured=1 to featured=2 (do not change anything related to its status in other featured picture processes). If the image description page uses the old {{Featured picture}} template, replace it with {{Assessments|featured=2}}.
- Remove the image from all categories beginning with "Featured [pictures]" (example: Featured night photography, Featured pictures from Wiki Loves Monuments 2016, Featured pictures of Paris).
- Remove the "Commons quality assessment" claim (P6731) "Wikimedia Commons featured picture" from the picture's Structured data.
- Add a delisting-comment to the original entry in chronological list of featured pictures in bold-face, e. g. delisted 2007-07-19 (1-6) with (1-6) meaning 1 keep and 6 delist votes (change as appropriate). The picture must not be removed from the chronological list.
- If this is a Delist and Replace, the delisting and promotion must both be done manually. To do the promotion, follow the steps in the above section. Note that the assessment tag on the file page and the promotion tag on the nominator's talk page won't pick up the /replace subpage that these nominations use.
Manual archiving of a withdrawn nomination
- In Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list click on the title/link of the candidate image, then [edit].
In the occasion that the FPCbot will not mark withdrawn nominations with a "to be reviewed" template and put them in Category:Featured picture candidates awaiting closure review just like if they were on the usual list, put the following "no" template:{{FPC-results-reviewed|support=X|oppose=X|neutral=X|featured=no|gallery=|sig=--~~~~}} - Also edit the title of the candidate image template and add after the image tag
not featured
For example:
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]] ===
becomes
=== [[:File:XXXXX.jpg]], not featured === - Save your edit.
- Open Commons:Featured picture candidates/candidate list, click on [edit], and find the transclusion of the nomination. It will be of the form:
{{Commons:Featured picture candidates/File:XXXXX.jpg}}
Copy it to the bottom of Commons:Featured picture candidates/Log/November 2025), save that page, and remove it from the candidate list.
